12 ms·

So you didn’t get a YC invite, what next?

• crdb 11y ago
  We were rejected last year after doing a very late application and probably because we hadn't quit our jobs nor built a prototype, or even lived in the same city (I hired my co-founder on a remote team before, and took him with me when I left). We probably ticked all the reject boxes. We kept pitching other investors for a while, then quit and bootstrapped the prototype by taking on consulting work. Pitching was hard and most APAC investors just wanted too much control for our comfort. Bootstrapping was actually easier than we thought, so when we got term sheets from local investors, we turned them down and kept getting consulting gigs (mostly data warehousing work - boring but necessary). 5 months later, and I think the product has gone into much more interesting directions without time and investor pressure than it might have otherwise, whilst we are closer as co-founders having worked together on the gigs and been through a few "client bumps". Some of the work actually helped clarify our own data model and understand our target market better. It's quite freeing not to have a boss at last; I'd say that was the main factor in not taking money (the banker who thought he might "quit the bank and join you guys to help out with management" was particularly scary). But YC's terms - even excluding all the advantages that come with the network, coaching, reputation etc. - were by far the most generous and founder friendly, especially in their lack of protective provisions. Not sure what this thread is for, but throwing the story in there since there are so few tales of bootstrapping and it's discouraged by PG in one of his money essays (he argues that it delays the launch). I think our story is most relevant for non-US-based founders who cannot as easily tap into the Valley money, and for more experienced founders who can command a high enough market value to make part time work.
  • tyang 11y ago
    Exactly. $1.7M premoney valuation and a chance to get advice from PG and others who have helped 6 unicorns come about and, per @sama, 22 others who can get there is pretty darn good, IMO.
    • crdb 11y ago
      On top of that: - the brand is enormous. All my funding discussions have been warm intros or a network I built myself, slowly (same for client work with one exception). Saying "we're YC" enables cold emails to actually get read. Same as having candidates to a job ad from MIT, Stanford, Harvard... it gets them a phone call and some attention. It helps not just with funding, but with hiring and even B2B sales (I personally looked at Heap's product for a client and talked to their sales team, only because I heard it was YC funded). - valuation, according to a better connected and experienced friend, jumps around 4x post-acceptance on any future funding rounds. Related to first point. If our valuation had gone up that much, the maths wouldn't work out in favour of bootstrapping. But what makes it really special is the lack of control. For example, I went into the final stages (10+ meetings, legal docs being drafted) of a $400k round... for 30%, with veto rights on practically everything and someone injected into management. It was tempting, especially pre-launch, but would have guaranteed no further rounds and misaligned incentives between us and investors. Even the <10% offers wanted things like vetos and RFR on any further funding round, that removed virtually all control we had, and would make it a lot harder to raise an A round when the time came. This, I think, was the major innovation brought about by YC. We're far from the days of Georges Doriot and DEC... (As an aside Terrence, since you're reading this - you American angels should pop over to other countries some time, valuations are much friendlier!)
      • tyang 11y ago
        Great points, thank you.
• lettergram 11y ago
  My recommendation is that you should start with a problem you are passionate about. Quite literally, I keep a notebook of stuff that annoys me. Then, every night I review it and try to coalesce it down to the essence of a problem. Youll find that youre probably passionate about 5 or 6 of the problems you come accross. Fix one of these problems for yourself and 99 times out of 100 someone will be willing to pay for it.
  • tyang 11y ago
    Sometimes I wonder if "Make something people want" could be even better if it were "Make something you and other people want".
• juniorexplorers 11y ago
  As someone who didn't get invited either, I feel like this is a great opportunity to look at the business objectively and check off the boxes that as a founder sometimes you don't think much about. Doing the application started it for me and already we are making changes and decisions we probably would not have focused on since we have been focused on execution. Markets are dynamic so ideas need to be dynamic as well in how we adapt to stay within the framework of the vision but be able to optimize the probability of success. Taking a step back and evaluating team, technology, opportunity and current execution plan takes a lot of time and effort which this process forced us to do. It all starts with confirming that the idea is good and there is a real problem here to solve but once that is checked off, there are so many variables that come into play. My approach is to try and not dwell as much on why YC did not invite me but focus on what else I can do to fulfill the potential of the idea. If we get this right, we might not need to apply again and should be on our way. If not we either come back bigger and better or will have decided that this is not the business we want to be in. All good outcomes right?
• robertandy 11y ago
  Here is a great sum of your post in one line: “If you’re absent during my struggle, don’t expect to be present during my success.” - Will Smith In my view the way YC has been openly crushing morale of solo-founders for years is simply pathetic. Is it a crime to be a solo-founder? Despite equal number of successful startups from solo-ists, they continue to snub the potential and rather host even those who would easily rip-off ideas and interface from others. Given that they are almost a monopoly and monopsony "middleman" of all things startups and nearly control other movements (media/VCs/other stakeholders) I see this as a dangerous precedent for startups in general. Last thing we want is an Amazon-like agent that controls our destiny.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • logicallee 11y ago
    Robertandy, YC is incredibly encouraging at stages that nobody else is. They have open lectures on how to start a startup. You can watch them for free right now. I feel your frustration that they don't fund certain things, but this should not be called crushing morale. Please remember one thing: the reason YCombinator is a monopoly is that others are cowardly, don't know how to invest at the seed stage and help founders build huge, scalable businesses with a community of awesome people around them. This community is a hallmark of YC, and one of the obvious things that must be true about any founding group that has at least 2 members is that by definition they are social enough to keep a group of at least 2 cofounders together. If you feel YCombinator is a monopoly you have to please by having a cofounder, why don't you get a cofounder?
    • robertandy 11y ago
      Disagree! The entire process is rigged against solo-founders and you CANNOT deny that fact. Even your own last sentence in the end contradicts you. > why don't you get a cofounder. Dude what about this: I don't want to marry. I do not want to own a house. I do not want a co-founder.
      • 11y ago
• qaiserhabib 11y ago
  we didnt' get an invite from YC. We have a great idea, an excellent team of 5 (1 hustler 4 engineers) and a great "plan". What are the effects of this rejection on us? None. We never took YC seriously. We believe in our idea and we are very close to alpha launch and we don't need YC to succeed. We only applied to YC so we could have that media boost or the YC title attached to us. We understand why we got rejected, we had alot of plans and zero traction (because of how we built our strategy to get product market fit). My advice to other founders: YC is just an incubator, they can only give you advice and introduce you to other founders and investors and give you ~100k in seed funding. You can get all of these things without YC. Infact, it's much easier outside. YC won't make you magically succeed if you don't have a great team or a great product, there's only so much they can fix about you in 3 months. So don't ever let that rejection get to you and keep focused on what you're building and keep evolving until you have product market fit!
• Alex3917 11y ago
  A lot of the startups YC doesn't fund aren't necessary bad, just too early. And while not getting into YC will never destroy your company, getting in too early actually will -- if you start the clock on your company while you are still missing some basic skills, if your founder and you later break up, if there are still too many technical/product uncertainties, etc. If your idea isn't inherently bad then just peel away away some layers of risk and try again.
• peterbuzz 11y ago
  We got rejected. Congrats to everyone who made it. YC is not the only source of funds and advice... on to the next one! It sure is a bummer though. We would love to apply again as they encourage us, but that will be a massive waste of our precious time. Waiting for the next batch is a luxury we can't afford, so for us sadly YC is that great experience that we will never have.
• tomjen3 11y ago
  Or just be honest about it - YCs filter isn't that great and then become the next AirBnB anyway.
• joelrunyon 11y ago
  Build it yourself anyways. Very interesting that so many entrepreneurs - who by definition are bypassing gatekeepers - still tend to look at something like YC as a litmus for whether or not they can move forward or are a "success." Obviously, there are some company models that need venture money behind them, but it's not an excuse for not doing your idea.
  • mathattack 11y ago
    This is very true. If someone won't chase an idea because it wasn't validated by YC in the first place, they seem to be on very weak footing to begin with. (Similar to the people who only want a high brand name school.)
• amerf1 11y ago
  YC is not perfect and they have admitted so in several occasions. Plus they can only fund so many startups, so getting rejected doesn't mean you have to rethink your startup. The way I see it, continue with your startup and apply again.
• dazbradbury 11y ago
  We were rejected 3.5 years ago after interview stage. We built, we launched, we hustled and we grew. 12 months ago we launched a nationwide TV campaign. OpenRent[1] is now the largest letting agent in the UK (bigger than Foxtons for example), established, and well on the way to fully disrupting one of the oldest industries in the world. YC rejection was tough, but we believed in the idea and whilst I'm sure YC could have helped us make fewer mistakes, it didn't stop us wanting to solve the problem we all believed in. So we went and did what it took to succeed. Chin up to anyone facing rejection - use the information learnt from the application process, and go prove them wrong! [1] - https://www.openrent.co.uk https://www.openrent.co.uk
  • testingonprod 11y ago
    Would you guys mind serving up some higher res assets please? :)
    • dazbradbury 11y ago
      You'd be surprised by the connection speed and devices used by the majority of our users... But sure, you can see we're doing that partially already, with a more general overhaul coming!
  • codewithcheese 11y ago
    Thanks for the encouragement and sharing your story!
  • mcintyre1994 11y ago
    FYI, I'm getting an infinite loader signing in with Gmail (Safari/OSX), error console has some info: TypeError: null is not an object (evaluating 'a[qa]') In a script called OriginalFromGoogle, line 2378, shows as: ca(a[qa], Jc), i.setTimeout(function () { in the writeMesssageToPopup_ function.
    • dazbradbury 11y ago
      Thanks for reporting - must have been a change in the last few hours. Will see what I can do to get that rectified ASAP!
• benerd 11y ago
  Am Benerd From Kenya and my start up dint get an invitation into YC this summer.. I have a great team n awesome prototype but Since I really follow what YC start up school teaches about start ups,They had a reason of Not inviting us for the next batch ,this has made us go back to the drawing board and rethink what we haven't got right yet..infact we have started seeing flaws in our prototype that we didn't see before If a team was invited from Africa ,that is great and it was my dream to have at least an African team in YC.Thanks you guys for the great efforts you are making to see start ups through the emotional roller coaster.
• tonysuper 11y ago
  I'm 18, and my co-founder is just turning 18 in a week. So we never really expected to get in. We are both completely broke, so we're going to launch a kickstarter campaign to see if we can get the funding for more hosting (and the ability to work full-time over the summer). From there, well, I guess we try to grow and take over the world.
  • humanarity 11y ago
    Sounds like a workable attitude, best of luck to you! My bet's on you.
• mpdehaan2 11y ago
  I never even thought to apply. Why? The San Francisco requirement was against my ideals that tech exists everywhere, and that's not how I wanted to build a company. More so, the stake they required relative to funding was pretty huge. I would now, to a degree, put YCombinator kind of in the same vein as Shark Tank in outside perceptions - allegedly that show takes 3% of your company whether you get a deal or not. Clearly, advice is offered for either winner, but the deals given out are often not as valuable as the "press" or label in that case. While a lot of interesting companies have come out of that particular incubator (thanks for the forum, BTW), there's also a lot of business models that I consider on the edge of a bubble, and without the weird investment ecosystem that does exist in the bay area, I don't think many of them would exist. I say this in terms of valuations of what service the business provides to society, and how niche is is, versus "valuations" in the typical investment sense. What is valued is, I don't know, skewed in strange ways. By all means, if you want to try to create a startup (which I do believe is not for everyone, or even most people), build things your own way if you really believe in the idea. If you can bootstrap things and avoid venture capital entirely, and be your own boss, even better. I'd advise thinking of it as a company from day one, rather than a startup, and don't think of funding as a way to get profitable. That means you'll be free of the venture capitol addiction at a much earlier time, and be in more control of your own destiny.
  • quadrature 11y ago
    Tech does exist everywhere and so do markets and YC has funded companies internationally and in other cities/states. The only requirement is that you be in the bay area for the duration of the program which I think is essential because of the networking opportunities,office hours and dinners that you'll be attending in person.
  • beering 11y ago
    > Why? The San Francisco requirement was against my ideals that tech exists everywhere, and that's not how I wanted to build a company. So you have to be in the Bay Area for 3 months. After that you are welcome to be anywhere. If being in the Bay for the 3 months is not feasible, then just say so, or find something near you instead. > More so, the stake they required relative to funding was pretty huge. This is entirely dependent on what you currently have and what you hope to get out of YC. If you're just starting out, that 10% stake is worth approximately $0, so it's a good deal. If you're doing $5mm in EBITDA a year, then it's not. But to say that it's "pretty huge" without any context is shortsighted.
• benerd 11y ago
  Most successful tech companies in the world have atleast 2 co-founders,Look even at the company in the World that most founders draw inspiration from(Facebook)..It had technically 5 Co-Founders..A start up is too much work for a single founder,you need to Find people who complement
• sibmike 11y ago
  Have not noticed this one so started my own:(, but i'll comment here too:) So you got rejected? Good! 1. Now you know you KNOW you're on your own! 2. Next time you apply you will know that accelarator is not THE CHANCE to get to where you wonna be. Its just a SHORTCUT that you can take, or NOT. Lately I have that feeling that people tend to approach accelerators like they approach Santa: "Dear Santa, I have been a flibustier all my life, and I have a bright idea, and I am really really smart. So please help me get my dreams come true..." Does not work. If you THINK your idea is something that has to be done. Just go for it. Make it your mission and do whatever it takes to accomplish it. Once I met those guys from UK in Siberia riding their bikes. I asked em WTF? Well, they told me, they are on a mission to go around the globe on bikes.. Why? They had no clue, I had no idea, but they have done it. (find em "tough miles") Thats what a start up is, it may be even tougher. (thats actually SCARY. Coz you will NOT have support from your friends, family, spouse and any reasonable person.) IF you do it anyway, sometime you'll KNOW it works (coz you have clients and revenue and the growth). then YOU decide if you want to take the SHORTCUT or not. Hope that helps. Listen to Iron Maiden - The Trooper There is always a chance. Sincerely, Mike PS: I will just go on painting Cathedrals to get the funding. Incorporte in HK. And launch my app for the HardHeads in July 2015:)
• humanarity 11y ago
  Disclaimer: I applied S15 and they declined to invite me. How do you know what you were rejected for? It doesn't matter. Either you were rejected because the assessment was it will not work, or you were rejected for a content free reason: 300 others were stellar, you weren't in the 300. You don't want to know because you want to run the experiment. Any assessment pre-run is fortune telling, which adds zero content. Run the experiment, because the results, +ve or -ve, are valuable. You don't need YC's or anyone's "approval" to become an oustanding success, or to believe in your idea. The unfortunate truth I realized today is this: I believed "YC is the best." If they sometimes fail to select the best, that means they actually can't be. If you believe in yourself, and your idea, as I do, then when someone says, "you and your idea are not as good as theirs", you choose to have a lower opinion of their judgement. And because you have a lower opinion of their judgement the image of YC becomes less than it was, which is unfortunate. So getting a rejection is unfortunate, because it's a compelling idea that there's really a place that "gets" all the great ideas, and where all the quality founders can mingle. The thing I realized is this is a fantasy. As good as YC is, if they decline your proposal and you and your idea work, it's not what you're looking for. That's tough, because it's nice and comfortable to think there's a "destination", beside your business, where you can go and meta-discuss all the things about your business around people who embody the traits you respect, and who are creating the successes you admire. Maybe my idea and me really don't work, and I'm just blind to the ways in which they don't because I don't have the perspective YC has. That's a possibility. I don't believe that's likely, and I choose to believe in myself and my idea. Even so, feeling like an outsider to this "magical world" of YC is tough. Especially when you spend 40 days through the application period mentally aligning yourself, and convincing yourself that this is really somewhere you and your idea belong. The adjustment period when they say, "no it isn't" takes some getting used to. But more shocking than this personal readjustment is realizing that actually, no, there is no special place out there that is made just for me and my startup. That's tough, because it's nice to think there is that. Tho for every person for whom that is now a reality, 98 others it's not -- and that's a lot of pain. My conclusion is really that YC is not that important. It can't be, because there's still so much talent outside it. It's just an image of importance that emerges when any concentration of talent occurs. It's nice to think there's a "leader" there's someone to "guide you", and yet in reality, it works to guide yourself. As people making things, we're the ones who are creating something new that didn't exist before. That's pretty much the definition of there not being a "destination" or a "point man" for us. We're out the front, ourselves. To all my other people now 7% (and in numerous other ways) richer, onward! To everyone who's getting in, I feel a little sorry for you -- because they can't be as good as we imagined because there's so much talent still left on the track. For my part, I'm happy to be in the bigger, wider world, than in a narrower one. As I read my mail this morning, a strange sense of relief washed over me. Now I can do this thing my way, at my own pace, and not worry about tracking it through a 3-month hot house, which I'm sure feels like a great opportunity, and it is, tho as for that, I'm happy on the road I'm on. This came to mind: two roads diverged in a yellow wood and sorry I could not travel them both and be one traveller long I stood and looked down one as far as I could to where it bent in the undergrowth . Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear; Though as for that the passing there Had worn them really about the same, . And both that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black. Oh, I kept the first for another day! Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back. . I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. . Robert Frost -- not of YC ;)
• neonbat 11y ago
  A lot of the rejected companies are confused as to why they didn't get into YC or are behaving as if it's some great mystery. Looking at some of their websites though it kind of seems like they just didn't read Paul's essays. If I can't visit your website and immediately understand your business that is a red flag. People are always fancy-fying and abstracting the descriptions of their businesses. Most of the businesses websites I see applying to YC are less of "We sell apples. Use our product. Get you some apples." and more of "We create high level fruit distribution mechanisms. Currently we are supporting Apples in our network. We plan to support other fruits in the future. We're gonna REVOLUTIONIZE the way you acquire fruit." If I was at YC I would be looking for people who physically described what their company does; I see a lack of that in the rejected companies.
  • actraub 11y ago
    +1
  • richardbrevig 11y ago
    I love your apple/fruit example. This is a major problem I see in many startups, their unique value proposition is absolutely confusing. It's hard to get right, but is a very important step for a web business these days.
• jrwmiv 11y ago
  Just got rejected. Most likely because we are so early on, haven't launched and are hardware and software. Too many red flags for YC in an application pool with thousands of established companies. Doesn't mean that this means there is anything wrong with what we are doing. Never give up due to rejection, it takes rejection to succeed. Time to hustle and show YC why they should take a closer look at the underdogs.
• chichutschang 11y ago
  Apply to bootcamp.mit.edu :)