

Valley of Broken Dreams: A YC Postmortem - revolvingcur
http://warren.igsig.org/?p=19

======
martythemaniak
Sadly, we did not make it either. Since I don't have a blog, I'll just say a
few things here...

Basically, we did everything we could on our end:

-Had a pretty good demo. We spent a few months working on it part-time and we had the entire thing up and running with enough features for it to be roughly usable and we had some nice mock-ups of the future stuff we wanted to put in. I even showed them that TechCrunch featured one of the UI components (that was released as a standalone widget) done by our UI guy.

-we prepared very well. We met with a few people from the local startup community (organizers of DemoCamp, a CEO and CTO of a local startup, etc) and had them pick apart our pitch. They did a very good job and brought up a lot of concerns which we worked out. People I emailed beforehand said to expect a lot of questions at the interview and to think on your feet, but because we had already gone through this 3 times with the local people, none of the questions during the interview were new to us and we had decent answers.

So why didn't we get accepted? Well, there were simply better teams around
that day. The email from pg did give two reasons, but to be honest, they were
pretty flaky. The first was the community aspect (ie, it depended on user
generated content) and the second our planned revenue stream. We had good
answers to these ready since we expected they'd be raised during the interview
and plenty of previous YC startups had overcome the same problems. The way I
see it, if pg's philosophy is "build something nice people want to use, then
worry about the money" and he rejects you because of revenue concerns, then
it's basically a nice way of saying "Sorry, I just liked the other teams
better"

Of course this illustrates a one of the downsides of the whole startup thing.
A lot of the things you do in life are pretty deterministic: if you spend
1hr/day learning Spanish, you'll know it well sooner or later, if you spend
1hr/day working out, you'll increase your stamina or muscles or whatever
you're working on. If you work 1hr/day on a startup up.. well, its
probabilistic, so all you're doing is tilting the odds in your favour, but
you're never guaranteed anything - be it progress or success or whatever. So
all the work on the app and all of the preparation for the demo/interview was
for naught.

Anyway... it'd be a shame to throw so much work away, so we'll probably work
on it a bit more, then release it as a side project or something. At least
have a decent project to put on future resumes or whatever.

~~~
mynameishere
Your last paragraph strongly suggests to me that you were rightly rejected.

Here's the last paragraph:

 _Anyway... it'd be a shame to throw so much work away, so we'll probably work
on it a bit more, then release it as a side project or something. At least
have a decent project to put on future resumes or whatever._

Translation: "Because one VC firm rejected us, I... _suppose_...I can still
use the incipient startup as resume filler. Or whatever""

That's a loser attitude if there ever was one, and I'm going to guess that VCs
look for it.

~~~
nostrademons
"That's a loser attitude if there ever was one, and I'm going to guess that
VCs look for it."

I'd imagine VCs look for it too, but it's important to remember that what
people _say_ and what they _do_ often have no correlation, and it works both
ways. There're some folks that are all "rah, rah, we're going to take over the
world" and then they crumble at the first difficulty. Then there are others
that are "well, maybe it'll work and maybe it won't, but if it doesn't it'll
look great on a resume, so I think I might give it a try, at least for now",
then they keep at it for 8 years and exit for millions of dollars.

I'm reminded of James Hong's "Happiness = Reality - Expectations, so I do my
best to keep expectations low" post. Everybody chided him for being so blase
and said that if he expected to fail, of course he would. But if you look at
what James has actually done, it's clear that he _hasn't_ failed, he just
keeps his expectations low as a trick to stay motivated.

~~~
wheels
There's a funny disconnect that you can pull off though that I find quite
useful. You can still be determined that you're going to take over the world
without actually expecting it. It doesn't make much logical sense, but it's a
pretty convenient way to approach things. From what I can tell this mindset is
pretty prevant in i.e. sports teams.

------
rms
I should have reposted my old YC interview advice comment... I'll write a new
set for the next round.

One of the main tips and a reason we didn't get in is that if PG and co
suggest some kind of change to you, you should agree with whatever they say.
One thing they're testing for is flexibility. Don't waste time defending
yourself against them because you can't win.

Whatever they told you, think about it, run with it, and reapply in 5 months.
If you can actually make progress towards solving online dating they'll accept
you in a heartbeat. If YC was a VC that had a model for the types of companies
they were going to invest in, online dating would be at the very top of the
list.

~~~
jsjenkins168
As someone who was also turned down, my advice is actually the opposite: Do
_not_ reapply in 5 months.

It's a mental thing. If you always keep the dream of YC on a golden pedestal
in your mind (one that must be reached in order to be successful), you could
be setting yourself up for further disappointment and wasting valuable time.
I'm not saying that YC is not worth aspiring for (I still think its a
tremendous opportunity), just that dwelling on it rather than your product
will kill you.

5 months is a long time in startup world. You need to put your defeat behind
you as quickly as possible and focus on building your product. Remember, that
is what is really the most important.

Hopefully you learned some useful things about your idea and team from your
interview. We certainly did, and for that I'm thankful. Its a little
disappointing to hear that they no longer talk things over with you on the
phone, but at least you got to meet some smart people and got some critical
advice during the interview.

~~~
nostrademons
As someone who's been turned down 4 times from YC without getting to the
interview stage, I'd say _do_ reapply in 5 months. Don't fixate on it,
definitely do stuff in the meantime, but I think you should treat it as just
one more thing you can do to maximize the chance of success for your startup.

The big advantage of applying isn't so much that you'll get in (I've kinda
given up hope of that happening unless a buyout is imminent, a la Fleaflicker,
and at that point we wouldn't need them). It's that it gives you a regular
point to check your progress and see how what you've done stacks up against
what you said you'd do. My experience - with 3 consecutive application cycles
- is that we're basically doing exactly what we said we'd do in the first
application, just 60-80% slower than we anticipated. That's very useful data
when we're planning future milestones.

It also gives you a chance to revisit your assumptions and make any necessary
course corrections. For example, we had a founding-team issue that PG brought
to our attention with the first application that we corrected between app 1
and app 2. Several of the competitors we were initially afraid of have not
materialized. The market as a whole does not seem to be developing as quickly
as we thought it would, though it does seem to be developing. That's very
useful data when we're trying to budget finances and decide whether it's time
to go for outside funding. We have the excuse to take another close look at
our competitors and see what they're doing wrong and what they're doing right.

It's easy to go full steam ahead on coding and then miss fundamental changes
in the environment that render all your coding useless. 6 months is just about
the right period of time to revisit your assumptions and see if it's still
worth doing. You should be doing this anyway as a business, but YC gives you
an excuse and a deadline.

~~~
jsjenkins168
I only say that because it seems few groups continue to build their product
into something of quality after being rejected by YC and its sad. A prevailing
view is if they cant be funded by YC, then there is no point in continuing.

Its almost as if YC could foresee this would happen with certain groups and it
turns out true. Why does it seem all groups who are funded by YC continue to
build something and all who are not, dont? I am exaggerating about the
sharpness of that division but not by much.

It might often be because the idea is so early stage that it is easy for the
founders to get derailed before following through with its execution. It might
also be viewing YC as a requirement to be successful rather than one option.

You alone decide if you are willing to work until you bleed in order to build
something great. So dont waste too much time thinking about things which could
get in the way. I would really to see more founders pick themselves up after
rejection and go on to release something stellar.

~~~
ericb
I'm sure it's two-fold. YC filters out people who aren't committed. Also,
having someone believe in you makes you believe in yourself--it becomes a
self-fulfilling prophecy. This works in a negative sense, as well. For
example, when pg says your chances of succeeding without a cofounder are low,
if you internalize that, you won't succeed without a co-founder, because "why
try" if you can't succeed?

------
suboptimal
Secret to life: it's about the stories.

Fifty years from now will you remember that day spent coding, or will you
remember your adventure in California?

------
Harj
just going through the process of failing already puts you ahead. after
school, most people don't put themselves in positions where they can fail at
something. it's not human nature. so congrats.

------
utx00
you're putting waaaay too much weight on this silly idea of startup success.
seriously man, put things in perspective. what exactly were you expecting to
get? life comes with its own sets of problems regardless of where you are.

if you have any savings go and travel the world. if you don't, work for a
year, and then do it. my guess would be that 3 months from now you'll be
laughing at yourself.

good luck.

------
signa11
“What has greater social impact than online dating?!”

getting laid with online dating ?

~~~
mrtron
If you are downmodding this, quickly read some craigslist person seeking
person posts.

I would guess the majority are just looking for random sexual hookups. Some
sort of eHarmony matching for sexual partners would probably be an
overwhelming success.

~~~
schtog
id make a wild guess and say those already exist in community form on the
internets.

for sex the problem is the same as in "real" life, women can choose so i doubt
its just hooking up over the internets to get laid...

if guess its 10 to 1 or worse men to women wanting to get laid...

and that 1/10 is not jessica alba.

~~~
mrtron
I really doubt that the ratio is 10:1, and if it is on most sites like that
then there lies the problem to be solved.

Given any sort of relationship definition, I would guess that is never far off
1:1 for women and men interested.

And not all men are interested in finding Jessica Alba...she is obviously
attractive but that is only a piece of the puzzle :)

~~~
menloparkbum
Strangely enough, I know someone who got a PhD studying behavior on dating
sites. She worked with a few dating sites and had access to their data. She
also came up with clever ways to mine data from sites that didn't give her
explicit permission. You're right in doubting the 10:1 ratio - it is more like
20:1 to 100:1 depending on what site you're on.

~~~
mrtron
I don't disagree with you or your friend's numbers.

What I was trying to say was the number of women in general who participate in
something like one night stands or a purely sexual relationship MUST be closer
to 1:1 than 10:1 or 100:1.

Hence, there is great opportunity in putting together both sides of the
equation, online sites by your numbers need to somehow draw the attention of
women who they are clearly neglecting to serve well.

------
LostInTheWoods
Bah. Getting rejected by YC is not the end of the world; and getting accepted
by YC is no guarantee of success. At the end of the day, if you don't truly
believe in your startup, then why are you doing it?

------
andr
Just like OP, one thing I didn't like about the interviews was the instant and
final yes-or-no answer. In our case, YC said they were worried about a problem
we did not think would be a serious issue. We did come up with a solution, but
only a few hours later, which, apparently, was too late.

~~~
pg
_one thing I didn't like about the interviews was the instant and final yes-
or-no answer_

Yes, that is a problem for us too. We'd like to be able to spend longer with
each group. But we want to give the maximum number of groups a chance to
interview. If we spent more time on each interview, we'd have to interview
fewer groups.

~~~
cperciva
Have you considered drafting some YC alumni into helping you do interviews?
I'm imagining a system where applicants would have several interviews with YC
alumni and then you'd interview the groups which get the most "yes" votes from
your alumni screeners -- I'm guessing that after going through the YC program
people get reasonably good at identifying what it takes to be a successful YC
participant.

Of course, this would depend on the availability of YC alumni. I know I'd sign
up to do it -- if I were a YC alumnus, that is -- but the fact that I spend
several hours per week acting as an alumni representative on my alma mater's
university senate (and committees thereof) marks me as being unusually prone
to volunteer for such things.

~~~
pg
We did that this cycle. It seems to have worked well.

------
fleaflicker
It sounds like the founder didn't really believe in the idea.

I would not invest in founders that aren't passionate about what they are
doing.

Find something that makes you excited.

~~~
JayNeely
Speaking of investing, now that your startup's been acquired have you thought
about becoming an angel investor?

Everyone's always saying there's a need for more startup investors who were
formerly startup founders themselves. Checking your profile on Fleaflicker, I
see you're in NYC; there are bound to be angel investor groups that you could
join if you didn't want to do it alone.

~~~
fleaflicker
I'm not done with Fleaflicker yet. It's still my top priority. But yes, the
thought has crossed my mind. Nothing more than that though.

------
chrysb
If you have an idea you really believe in and you quit because YC didn't buy
into it then you're fooling yourself.

You really need to follow through with your ideas whether or not other people
believe after they heard your pitch for 10 minutes.

YC is indeed a great opportunity, but it's definitely not the only one. Keep
working at your idea, go out to conferences and meet-ups -- you can network on
your own. Be yourself and be your product.

I believe something that is important to YC is that you are not banking on
their funding to fulfill your idea. You need to have the mentality that you
are going to finish your product with or without them. You need to make them
want to get on your boat rather than you praying to be on theirs.

We came across the application and decided to fill out as an exercise for
solidifying our idea. Whether or not YC was going to fund us, we still had a
plan of action, which is essentially still the same. I feel that our mentality
is what gave us the confidence to interview the way we did.

Try again next time, don't be so bitter. Give value before you get value. If
you make your product and it is good, word will spread, and you will succeed,
just keep at it. Please.

------
dhimes
Sounds like you have some good takeaways from the experience. Next time, it
won't be pg making comments but customers. You'll have to work harder to read
between the lines, but you'll do fine if you give their suggestions, hints,
and concerns the same weight you should have given pg's.

------
alex_c
Congrats! Hopefully the first of many rejections.

(and eventual success)

------
babul
YC is not the be all and end all. We all have rough rides at time and fall
down. Pick yourself up, learn from the experience and keep moving forward,
don't stop.

------
jgrahamc
I'd be happy to hear about the online dating ideas. I think that is an are
that's ripe for new thinking.

~~~
iloveyouocean
I have been following Paul Graham for some time and attended Startup School a
couple years ago. At that time pg was somewhat adamant that they were not be
interested in funding companies innovating in the 'online dating' space. Of
course they ended up funding iminlikewithyou. But the initial negativity led
me to decide against applying to YC. But it hasnt stopped our team from
following our dream. We have been working very hard on modernizing (in fact
revolutionizing) 'online dating'. When I tell people this they are generally
unbelieving and point out all the terrible shortcomings of current sites. To
me, that signals opportunity. We are really going to change things for the
better. Although our site is still under wraps, if you are interested in
finding out more then visit <http://www.jumbledate.com> and put your name on
the list.

~~~
pg
_At that time pg was somewhat adamant that they were not be interested in
funding companies innovating in the 'online dating' space._

I doubt I said that. In fact I used the wretchedness of existing dating sites
as an example of an opportunity for startups in a couple early essays on
startups.

~~~
iloveyouocean
Yes, it was exactly those articles ('Ideas for Startups' and 'How to Start a
Startup') that solidified my intentions to leave the (poorly managed) startup
I was currently working on and do my own thing. I have never looked back. The
comment I was referring to didn't appear in an article, but rather in a
conversation when pg said something like (paraphrasing) "We have seen enough
applications with ideas for online dating sites." If I am mistaken about this,
then I apologize, perhaps I simply didn't limn the context or feeling of the
statement. In any case, my original intent in commenting was to say, 'Follow
your heart and your dreams, regardless of what the world says.' You will
almost certainly learn something valuable from this experience.

------
wumi
go out and build your product and let the users prove whether or not your
startup is valuable.

