
YC Interview Tips from a Former YC Partner [video] - garry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfTgzA6iKZc
======
cbanek
"Remember to build your business" \- so obvious, but I think we're honestly
missing that these days, so it's good to hear it. Now it seems fake it till
you make VC money, then take the money and run.

------
cynusx
The inverted pyramid answer is a great one, I wish that was the default in
interviews in general

------
simonebrunozzi
I'm kind of getting tired of this "cargo cult" attitude towards YC. Yes, it's
a great thing, yes, great companies emerged from YC, but please... Enough
already.

~~~
garry
YC changed my life, and changed the lives of hundreds of founders I know
personally.

~~~
diafygi
Isn't that kind of a shallow argument, though? Scouting changed my life, and
changed the lives of hundreds of scouts I know personally. What matters is
_how_ it changed it.

~~~
RaceWon
> What matters is how it changed it.

I read his profile. 'Nuff said

~~~
diafygi
Hmmm, isn't that the parent's point, though? Being super successful as a VC or
VC-funded startup is touted as the ultimate success by YC. However, there are
many on this forum who don't agree that VC success is better than other types
of success (bootstrapping, politics, charity, family, etc.), and some who even
view VC culture as a net negative to society.

My point was that how you receive someone saying YC changed their life is
highly dependent on whether you think that the result should be celebrated or
emulated. Everyone has experienced things that changed their lives and the
lives of those around them, so to someone who doesn't see VC success as very
desirable, it comes across as a fairly weak argument.

~~~
sudosteph
I guess I'm one of those people who consider VCs to be mostly negative. For
example, I'd argue that the single most important tip for getting into YC is
actually "attend Stanford".

But arguing against this type of content on HN is a losing battle. Better to
just vote for the stuff you do like and call out VCs on topics that actually
showcase their problems. There are many people reading HN who are genuinely
interested in this content, and the tone of the content is one of attempting
helpfulness. So making a show of shooting it down just because it's inane YC
stuff won't really win any hearts and minds. It's going to fizzle out on it's
own because it's a narrowly scoped subject and VC interview advice is pretty
easy to find online already.

~~~
garry
This is a misconception. The YC application is actually a great leveler
because applications are evaluated by other founders through a community where
building things for people is prized over pure credentialism.

VCs in general do have a terrible and unfair bias for Stanford. Frankly I went
to Stanford. In 2008 when I did YC and started raising our seed round, VCs
asked me why I even did YC because I had a Stanford degree.

I have seen so many people with no traditional background who succeed through
the program.

~~~
sudosteph
I've talked to people within YC who say just the opposite - that Stanford has
a special relationship with YC. I've seen a nearly exact copy of a project I
pitched to YC get accepted a year later, but this time with Stanford founders.

And I'm not using that as a stand-in for elite schools in general. The
requirement that founders physically locate themselves the bay is as big a
factor as anything.

Just because non-traditional people get in sometimes does not mean that there
is not still selection bias towards a particular group.

If you are so sure about your claims, then you should call for YC to release
the data to prove it. Specifically addressing the questions below.

1\. What percentage of all founding teams had at least one member who attended
Stanford? (Degree not even necessary - just attended at some point)

2\. What percentage of all applicants who had a team member with a Stanford
connection and got interviews?

3\. What percentage of all applicants who had a team member with a Stanford
connection got accepted?

Edit: Also, in case it wasn't clear - run the same data for any other schools
with a high volume of applicants. Questions 2 and 3 should be roughly equal if
there is no bias.

And I'd prefer to see the data over time as well. Doesn't have to be each
applicantion period, but at in least groups per year to see if trends changed.

