
Rejected from YC (Again) - sabbakeynejad
https://veed.io/blog/rejected-from-yc#update
======
adim86
This is a fantastic story! A couple of takeaways here. The team took rejection
VERY well. This is not as easy as you may think. This to me shows the founders
believe in what they are doing and have a deeper goal than just making money.
The ability to take the feedback and double down in just a few days is
motivational.

Second, The power of positive response to negative situations. Lord knows how
long it would have taken them to work on MRR if not for the rejection and they
could easily have wasted time fiddling with copy and graphics, but the
pressure for YC to re-evaluate them made them release ASAP and now they are
already making revenue. At the end of the day, YC rejection allowed them to
start generating proper revenue before they would have initially, to me that's
a win, and they still get to keep the shares YC would have taken and now they
have a higher valuation for whomever they apply to next for funding.

This is a great framing of a story that could easily be a sob story blog post.
Keep it up, guys. You are bound for success.

~~~
mikeokner
_> The ability to take the feedback and double down in just a few days is
motivational._

Maybe. I took it slightly differently. They received negative feedback after a
10 minute pitch, and immediately dropped everything to change their product &
strategy to appease a potential investor.

Was monetizing in this manner at this moment the right strategy for them?
That's a pivotal decision to make and not one I'd throw together at 2 am to
try impress a party with no skin in the game.

~~~
dyeje
I think considering they've grown the MRR to $5000 from nothing since then, it
looks like it was a pretty good strategy even if you don't like how it was
concocted.

~~~
hluska
It is very rare that I upvote two comments that seem to be in opposition to
each other. In this case, I think it's warranted because you're both likely
correct.

In your favour, the strategy was successful and they grew to $5k MRR in four
months with estimates suggesting they'll hit $100k in recurring annual revenue
by the end of the year. It worked so it's hard to criticize it.

But, what if it hadn't, or what if the founders were in a different situation
where they had a bigger team? Last minute "we have to do this now" decisions
are often wrong. When they're not, they often result in some really ugly code
that will be tough to maintain. Further, they can be hard on morale.

Chances are that the founders had this type of conversation and talked about
the risks while they were brainstorming. It almost sounds like they had
debated this in the past. Those kinds of debates are very valuable and I think
that founders need to talk about how a new feature can go bad.

~~~
nmfisher
I think you're generally right, but "we have to make money NOW" is a last-
minute decision that's probably right in every scenario.

------
fillskills
We got rejected 4 years ago and ended up building the company to about 40M/yr
revenue. And we have many VC rejections to add to it. So dont take any
rejections too seriously. Focus on the customer need and building a good team.

~~~
nojvek
YC isn’t a slam sunk. It’s funded 1000s of companies and ~100-ish have made it
big.

So you can say 9/10 times they get it wrong but 1/10 is worth it for them.

So if YC gets it wrong, that’s their loss. There is no rule that says to build
a great product and a great company you need YC or insane VC money.

So kudos to you sticking out and building a great product.

~~~
marvindanig
Also, ~90ish of those 100 successful ones have come from batches pre 2014, so
there is that… ;-)

~~~
soneca
If you define "success" as market valuation, assume that market valuation
grows with time for successful companies and YC select companies with a bias
for companies that are not successful yet... The fact that most successful
companies come from older batches is just a description of their business
model right?

~~~
marvindanig
Fair point! I'm sure there will be some run off successes among the current
crop as well, but so far, my sensibilities tell me that there has been a drop
in quality—and in general the appetite for risk taking within the YC has gone
down substantially.

Without the data of course it is hard to tell with 100% confidence.

~~~
soneca
My sensibilities are very different from yours. I see some crazy risk biotech
getting selected, not mention some crypto stuff that a lot of people claims to
have near zero value. Even the regular software ones seems as risky as always.

My impression is: same quality, same risk level, more companies.

------
jconley
YC is looking at this from the VC/startup perspective. "Does this group of
people with this company seem like they can make a billion dollar business in
the next ~10 years?" They want founders that target a huge (or growing /
potentially huge) market with stars in their eyes and some insight as to how
to own it.

If you're content with a small business and growing slowly then you are not a
good fit.

You might have a great business in the end, but still not be a fit for the
model. Like others have said, YC partners miss big hits. They're not perfect.
Keep going and if you have a relentless focus on month over month growth and
keep your churn down then you have a chance to get VC-style growth capital.
But, if you just want to bootstrap a profitable business you'll be better off
doing that on your own and getting bank loans or other risk-adverse capital.

~~~
theli0nheart
What you say is _technically_ true, but given how easy it is to pivot
nowadays, and the fact that YC prides itself on accepting teams even pre-
product, this "billion dollar business" line seems like a great way to reject
anyone they want for any reason.

~~~
Grustaf
Since it’s their money, it seems pretty reasonable that the should be able to
invest in whoever they want, for whatever reason.

~~~
theli0nheart
I agree, and I have no problem with that. What I _do_ have a problem with is
telling applicants how they make decisions in a nice fair way, when in fact
they use another, “secret” rubric that’s based more on brand and connections.
If you’re going to evaluate folks, don't lie about how you're doing it.

~~~
Grustaf
I’m not sure how it would benefit them to “lie” about their criteria, unless
they were secretly racist or something (clearly not the case). If anything
they would want to encourage the kind of founders they actually accept, to
make the process more efficient.

I’m sure the process isn’t entirely fair, since picking winners at such an
early stage is incredibly hard and they have so little time for each
candidate, but I’m also sure that they _try_ to be as fair as possible.

And I write this as someone that has been rejected about half a dozen times...

~~~
jconley
Garry just posted a video about the criteria they used in interviews when he
was there...

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfTgzA6iKZc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfTgzA6iKZc)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21288988](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21288988)

Note: He was one of the partners assigned to us and invested in our company
with his VC firm.

------
jakobegger
It's a bit off topic, but I wonder why everyone is so focussed on MRR (monthly
recurring revenue). Why are you focussing only on people who want to pay you
every month?

Especially for a tool that targets beginners. I mean, if someone uses your app
enough to keep paying 20€ for it every month, I would assume that they'll soon
want to upgrade to "real" video editing software. Adobe Premiere isn't that
much more expensive.

Of course, the non-power users can just use the free version with watermarks.
But who wants a watermark on their videos?

I always wonder why these SaaS companies do not offer something for casual
users?

If I want to edit just a single video from a special event, why do I need to
get a monthly subscription? Why can't I just pay $5 or whatever to remove a
watermark from a single video?

I understand that targeting casual users may seem less profitable than
targeting power users. But there's probably also lot less competition in that
space, and it may help with word of mouth advertising if you don't focus
exclusively on the most frequent users of your software.

~~~
huffmsa
Subscriptions are cool right now. It's an easy way, especially when you're a
new company, to show that people like your product and _need_ your product
enough to use it on a recurring basis.

One off purchases are great for consumables. You wouldn't expect a shoe
company to have recurring revenue (at least not monthly, should hopefully take
a bit longer than that for shoes to wear out). But for software, the current
emphasis is on making products people use, and pay for, regularly.

~~~
roelschroeven
> Subscriptions are cool right now > But for software, the current emphasis is
> [...]

Yes, SaaS is hot now, but this doesn't explain why.

> an easy way [...] to show that people like your product and need your
> product

This attempts to explain an advantage of Saas, but totally neglects the
viewpoint of the customer. And that's the problem I have with it: SaaS is an
advantage in the relation between the company and their investors (look,
recurring revenue!), but for the customer it's often not a good thing.

~~~
MisterBastahrd
The reason most companies have turned to SAAS is that it provides a more
reliable revenue stream at the low end of the spectrum given that individuals
are usually bad about paying attention to recurring billing, and much cheaper
to support at the enterprise level. You don't have to support 20 versions of
the same product, you just roll out one or two and support those.

~~~
agota
I remember someone mentioning that one of the dark secrets of the SaaS world
is reliance on people procrastinating on cancelling the subscription,
forgetting to cancel it, etc.

I think if I had a SaaS company, I'd try to avoid doing that, and encourage
people who are clearly not using the product to unsubscribe.

~~~
unlinked_dll
Most SaaS is enterprise facing, not consumer, so I don't know how much
procrastination fits into it as the momentum behind decision making in a
business.

~~~
xorcist
As long as you've got the cost approved for your cost center it will continue
to be paid until someone says otherwise. The end result is the same.

------
haolez
Tech startups and the Angel/VC ecosystem feels like a Ponzi scheme sometimes.
The goal doesn’t seem to be to create a profitable business, but to make a
good exit with the next investor’s money (or the public’s in the case of an
IPO).

Congratulations on your achievement!

~~~
Grustaf
I’m not sure it is very common that the next round investors buy shares from
the first round, seems to defeat the purpose of raising money. IPOs are a
different story though, cf We, Uber.

------
onion2k
It sucks to be rejected from anything, especially YC, but as a catalyst to
push you forwards and move from 'interesting tech project' to 'actual business
making money' it sounds like your interview was _exactly_ what you needed.
Well done.

~~~
sabbakeynejad
Completely agree, we now profitable and own 100% of the company. Thanks, YC :)

~~~
ageyfman
Profitable with $5k in monthly revenue? Profitable needs to cover market
salaries and all expenses, IMO. Maybe Ramen profitable.

~~~
onion2k
The Veed founders are in London, and while about $2500/month each after tax
isn't great money for a London dev it is definitely "low end junior dev" level
wages.

~~~
Southland
So the business costs $0 a month to run?

------
kabacha
> Video editor in browser

But why? YC takes up a lot of risky ventures but I really don't see video
editor in browser taking off beyond a fun little toy so I definitely get why
they refused. Could you elaborate more who's your clientele? I'm very curious.

Nevertheless it was a fun read!

~~~
tiborsaas
I had a browser based video editor startup (we failed). Video editing on the
desktop sucks if you are not a pro. For causal users it's like rocket science.
Enabling video editing in the browser is a godsend since it takes out so much
from the equation which makes it hard.

There are now successful startups in this space with serious investments.

~~~
mgsk
Huh? How does moving from desktop app to browser remove hard elements from the
equation?

~~~
tiborsaas
Just to name a few:

\- installing codecs

\- video conversion to the right format the editor can handle

\- video export to the right format, size, frame rate that works on the web

\- navigating a complex UI with usually the most common features hidden in
context menus and shortcuts

~~~
Grustaf
The first three are more or less the same thing, and could easily be handled
by a native app if there’s internet.

The last one seems completely unrelated to the choice between browser and
desktop. If anything it is harder to make nice UI in the browser.

~~~
tiborsaas
Your point is that a native app is better than a browser app or that current
solutions are good enough?

By moving rendering server side, a lot of problems are solved.

Casual users shouldn't install complex solutions and watch tutorials to do
simple things.

~~~
Grustaf
I didn’t know the rendering was done server-side, but if that saves time then
that’s a plus of course.

I don’t agree about installation at all, with mac app store (and probably on
the PC as well) installation is a one-click affair.

As to tutorials, I don’t see how the choice of platform would make it any
easier to use, how do you mean?

Oh, and my point was that These points don’t really seem to be arguments for a
browser app.

I would think that this makes most sense for casual video editing. If you can
be bothered paying for a subscription you might as well get adobe or some
other established, native app. Installation is trivial.

------
dcchambers
> So even though we have a great growing company, it is possible YC does not
> think we will be a billion dollar company.

And that's perfectly fine. Not every company needs to be a billion dollar
unicorn. Not every founder needs to strive for that.

Continue to grow the company organically. You have clearly already found a
path to success without YC. YC is great, but is not essential to your startup.
Not getting in is not the end of the world.

------
surfsvammel
I started a company about 10 years ago. We are making money, but not lots. But
that was never the point of the enterprise.

Me, and my co-founders, created the company for us to be able to work with
great colleagues and to limit the work hours. Our employees, including
ourselves, are not allowed to work more than 40h/week. We have parties and
trips where we invite all of our friends and family etc. We make sure our
employees have 80% of full salary for at least 9 months for parental leave.
Work-life balance is core to our values.

Our employee turn-over is basically zero. And if someone leaves we go out to
dinner to thank them, keep in touch and they are always welcome back to our
events and parties (also to come back to work for us of course).

I understand the idea of going big with a start-up, make tons of money. But
there are other goals one can pursue with a start-up that, at least to some,
is just as fulfilling.

Great job! You still have control and ownership and might be better off in the
long run.

~~~
woah
These responses are common on here, and in my opinion, unhelpful. A
conventional Vc funded businesses is supposed to either get big or fail. That
is the model. Everyone working on them and everyone investing in them gets
that. Advocating for someone to do something completely different by starting
a low-growth business is somewhat irrelevant to the conversation.

~~~
bsaul
Don't understand why you got downvoted, because what you're saying is indeed
the conventional wisdom : you can't get big without getting big fast , with a
lot of VC infused money, and work insane hours.

I think the next (current ?) generation is going to question that : values
like "durability" and "long term vision" starts to get fashionable again.

The old industries were based on "family businesses" where you would take
extreme care before letting someone new have shares of the company, where
growing was measured in terms of generations, based on reputation and quality
of work, and sustainability. And that gave giants, which lasted for
generations.

I think it's getting clearer and clearer that there are alternatives to "pump
and IPO" models, and that they may even be preferable for everybody (founders,
employees and customers) except VCs who needs quick cash rotation.

Note: maybe what you meant is just "we're talking about VC funded companies,
not other types". Still, i think VC will need to take new aspirations into
account when looking for next gen companies to fund.

~~~
techslave
> Still, i think VC will need to take new aspirations into account when
> looking for next gen companies to fund.

they don’t. it’s not their model. get big or fail is inherent to their model
and _is what their fund investors want_. for long term steady value or other
(valid) models the VC customers (LPs) can just invest in index funds.

The entire point of the VC is risk/reward. remove the reward and why would you
take on the risk?

------
huffmsa
I think you were rejected this go around for your own good.

You don't necessarily _need_ YC. You're growing at a growing rate. You're not
at any kind of impasse, you're not making a transition. You'd be giving up 7%
for a lesson you already got for free.

Bootstrap until you can't.

------
taytus
Hello there! I was rejected today for 7th time I believe.

We started selling our product in January, We just signed a contract with
Accenture, we are on track to have 1 million websites using our technology and
we are about $20k MRR (which we know will be a much more thanks to some
partnerships we are about to sign.

YC is an amazing opportunity, but it's just one of the many tools we have as
entrepreneurs. Keep working, be better and more important than anything, be
permissionless.

~~~
XJ6
After 5 rejections, what made you keep going back for the 6th and 7th?

Isn't there a limit beyond which it's a bit disrespectful to keep asking?

~~~
taytus
I'm an entrepreneur, I don't care about odds.

How is disrespectful to keep asking?

Just the act of applying is a healthy exercise, and chances are that the
people who got accepted are just better than our company. We keep moving, keep
making progress and keep applying.

I don't see what is disrespectful about that. I would love to learn more if
you care in elaborating.

~~~
diminoten
Honestly you might be past the point where you need YC, but I agree that
there's no harm in applying -- if your experience is anything like this one,
even applying to YC apparently gives some value to the companies doing it.

------
kvm
"Over the space of a year, we had a 60% MoM Growth Rate, 35K MAU and a great
team!"

60% MoM growth = 281x growth in a year. So you had 35k/281 = 125 users a year
ago? This seems like a disingenuous growth rate unless I'm missing something

~~~
MattyMc
Why is this disingenuous? Just curious :)

~~~
kvm
If I had 1 user on month 1, 1000 users on month 2, 5000 on month 3, 10000 on
month 4, I could claim a 1000% (10x) MoM growth rate. But that'd imply you'll
have 100K users during month 5 and 1M users on month 6, whereas it'll likely
be <40K.

One of the reasons you look at MoM growth rate is to project how fast it'll
keep growing over the immediate future. It's unclear to me right now

BTW don't get me wrong, I like the story and the hustle. Just not these
numbers :)

~~~
KindOne
Something like this? [https://xkcd.com/1102/](https://xkcd.com/1102/)

------
tomxor
> even though we have a great growing company, it is possible YC does not
> think we will be a billion dollar company.

This is a very positive take away: Y combinator is not for the vast majority
of startups (and that's ok). They are not destined to become billion dollar
companies, yet they will still go on to provide huge value to a large number
of people and turn a big profit - they should still exist, and may even be
vital for many.

> “Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do
> it.”

------
elkynator
Let's be honest. Even solely from money and evaluation point, being accepted
to YC increases your evaluation for your startup significantly. I'm not
advocating that this is why you need to apply, but FOMO on YC companies is
real among VC's. On demo day same companies who are pre-seed or just started
get new rounds on $15Mil+ evaluation. From what I have heard and seen the
biggest value is advice, but getting so much hype to raise big money is not
bad for founders.

~~~
haolez
I've heard from a VC recently that YC is usually associated with teams of very
young entrepreneurs and some VCs avoid this team profile. Not sure if this is
a widespread stereotype.

------
xiphias2
The most important take for me was that YC gave great free advice even in the
rejection email.

When I was working at Google I was not allowed to give detailed feedback to
the person whom I was interviewing and I hated that, because I think people
deserve to know why they weren't hired.

------
tpae
This is why I stopped applying to YC. I feel I've learned most of my startup
skills through trial and error by now, and don't have the need for them. I'm
able to raise funding, build a product, and grow the business. You guys have
already proven to be better than most of the applicants in my opinion.

------
diminoten
> We are now at $5,000 in monthly recurring revenue

You're doing it. Very impressive/cool. YC isn't the end-all, nor is HN. It's
_objectively_ impressive that you got rejected, saw something you can fix
right away, and executed. Not only that, but you continued to execute/grow
from there to $5k.

------
Fragoel2
Moral of the story is: there's more than one way to found a company and the
current startup model ( place hundreds of bets, hope a few win big) doesn't
work for all of them.

This story and others ( like the one of Gumroad:
[https://marker.medium.com/reflecting-on-my-failure-to-
build-...](https://marker.medium.com/reflecting-on-my-failure-to-build-a-
billion-dollar-company-b0c31d7db0e7)) that show that success can be achieved
even when others consider you a failure are refreshing and should taken as an
inspiration from those who wish to become an enterpreneur (and possibly by
everyone to be applied to life in general).

------
m10i
How did office hours between the two batches go? That was left out of the blog
post.

Similar to when you're in the lunch round during a job interview are told "oh
don't worry, lunch is not an interview, just relax", I imagine attending
office hours after you got rejected last time is in the same boat - it's
another hidden interview. It's possible that there were indicators during that
time period that indicated how the next batch might go for you guys :/.

Best of luck regardless

------
billconan
I can’t understand some of the YC invested companies. They don’t seem to be
billion dollar companies to me. For example, why is a form builder a billion
dollar company?

~~~
hortense
A form builder can evolve into an app builder.

~~~
antibland
Why is an app builder a billion dollar company?

~~~
billconan
ya

and also saying a form builder can become an app builder, is like saying a
plain paper can be used to print money ...

we all know that the delta between them is huge. We are not selling fairy
tales to VCs, or are we?

~~~
mavhc
Of course you are, "and then they all lived happily ever after, and by all I
mean 7 billion people, and by happily I mean paying $10/month or clicking ads"

------
xtracto
I would not sweat it. I was an early employee in a startup that got rejected
twice from YC (because it was from Mexico) and nowadays is one of the fastest
growing FinTech companies in LatAm and just raised their series B.

You know, lots of VCs maintain a good list of anti-portfolio, the most famous
being the BVP one ([https://www.bvp.com/anti-
portfolio/](https://www.bvp.com/anti-portfolio/) ).

------
greenie_beans
Maybe for you next YC app, take or leave this idea... Put Wibbitz out of
business by developing AI that can create short videos based on text from
written content. For instance, the video at the top of this page, which was
adapted from its attached article. [https://www.realsimple.com/food-
recipes/recipe-collections-f...](https://www.realsimple.com/food-
recipes/recipe-collections-favorites/desserts/wine-candy-pairing)

I don't know the first thing about AI or video, but I do know the humans who
make those sorts of videos just read the article and search Getty images. You
could prolly train the AI to have the right "taste" based on all the content
created by Meredith Corp lifestyle brands, like Real Simple, Food and Wine,
etc. Meredith now owns Time Inc, and I know that they and every other media
company are doing whatever they can to compete in the digital space. One way
is by adapting their written content into short, digest-able, social media-
consumed videos.

------
maannj
> it is possible YC does not think we will be a billion dollar company

Most VCs always emphasize that they invest in the team and not just the idea.
Ideas always evolve for startups. You guys not only monetized your MVP very
quickly, but also have shown that you are hustlers and work very fast. Even if
your idea "in current form" doesn't generate billion dollars, but you have
high potential as a team to find a path to success.

I worked in early stage startup few years ago, their original idea didn't show
huge success but they kept improving until they eventually found a path to
huge success and then acquired by large company. The improvement all revolved
around the same concept (which was an audio app)

IMO, the fact that YC didn't even invite you for the second round means that
they need to really work on their selection process.

------
silasdavis
This has come up before here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20224157](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20224157)

Posting because I found the analysis of filmgirlcw in that discussion
interesting.

~~~
agota
It was interesting, thank you for mentioning it!

------
cryptozeus
Great story and lots of positive messages here so let me take a different view
and get downvoted here. Obviously you want to be as big as airbnb and box
otherwise you will not be applying to YC year over year. Point here is that
don’t settle for these small wins of 100k revenue..and no it is not ok to NOT
be hugely successful company if you really want that go be that. Now there are
many other VC companies out there who have helped many others companies do the
same so Yc rejection is a blow but there are other options too. Don't stop
until you get into one.

------
mscasts
I don't understand. If they make money from the app, why not simply just keep
working instead of letting go of a portion of the company?

Sure, it is a lot of money they will get but it seems like they don't really
need it?

~~~
timurmamedov
Yo its Tim (co-founder @ VEED). It's not really about money for us, but more
about the hustle. We think of it more as getting into NBA or Olympic Games or
becoming a Navy Seal. It is tough to get in, tough throughout and will only
harden you if you don't break along the way. Just my 2c

~~~
mscasts
Ok, I get the desire, but personally I believe it's a bit fluffy.

I'd love to be in your guys position and I have a hard time just understanding
why you would want to give away control which is basically freedom, be
essentially be cool or be part of an "elite" group?

You guys already are cool, you don't need someone else to be it.

~~~
loopla
But are you giving away control by giving YC 7%? YC isn't a traditional
investor. You don't need to raise money on demo day and are free to go back to
being a small business that puts profit before growth. YC isn't going to send
you an angry email or frankly even remember you if you don't stay in touch and
continue to do office hours.

~~~
mscasts
Perhaps not. Maybe the contacts you will recieve and the amount of money is
enough to help you bootstrap stuff faster.

I have never actually started a company myself, so I wouldn't know. I just
think I would be extremely satisfied if I could sustain myself without any
investor money.

Seems like a better way to grow in my mind, if you're not aiming to be a
billion dollar company anytime soon.

------
kovacs_x
Sounds to me that being reject was super valuable to you guys anyway and
instead of being "accelerated" you'll be able to go in your own speed the way
you want with your product, not as YC, VC's or anyone else wants, which can
easily "accelerate" you into the void and add extra level of stress to the one
already, because imo investors are more like all-or-nothing types, when for
you building "normal" sustainable business, that can later be sold for some
X-XX million amount, is viable option as well.

Good luck and keep building! :)

------
Rainymood
I remember reading the article when it got first published in June 2019, this
is the same article but with an update at the end. YC W20 batch just got all
their letters.

Good luck, I hope you guys succeed and keep grinding!

~~~
sabbakeynejad
The update was because we just found our today we did not make the cut for W20

------
cristinaibunea
Oh, wow. Funniest thing. I started reading your blogpost, got to the part
where you mention the overpriced Airbnb, looked at the picture with the white
truck and then realised MY TEAM AND I HAVE BEEN LIVING IN UNIVERSE Z for the
past 4 months. Moved here when we got into YC and I'm currently writing this
message from here. Your story is truly fantastic.

~~~
timurmamedov
Haha, good old Universe Z. Didn't know anyone would recognize it. Thanks for
the kind words!

------
mrieck
And how did you feel about Kapwing recently getting $11 million funding for
the same thing?

This is how I felt:

[http://www.superanimo.com/animos/mfw-competitor-
gets-11-mil-...](http://www.superanimo.com/animos/mfw-competitor-gets-11-mil-
and-im-stuck-in-my-dayjob)

------
soulchild37
If you can have 100k ARR organically already why do you still need YC?

Nevertheless, great job and execution!

------
_0o6v
If your business is that good, you'll be able to find $150k in seed funding
elsewhere.

~~~
r_singh
The $150k is the least compelling reason to join YC. Most people apply to YC
for the ecosystem, community and access to (relatively) good VCs.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
Is that what YC tells you because they know $150K won't go far.

------
elmar
Wonderful story Thanks for sharing it with details and updates. A little
question is funding the current bottleneck for your growth? If you receive $X
Million how would you spend it to increase the growth?

~~~
timurmamedov
We are growing fast. But if we take $X Million yeah we will grow SUPER fast.
So yeah. But whether you should do it is up to you, there are horror/success
stories on either side.

~~~
Grustaf
To be honest, it’s hard to imagine a horror story where the protagonist has a
company that is growing fast and decides not to take on investors.

------
iamleppert
Forget whatever YC tells you about how they accept and vet startups. YC is
highly biased in their process. For an investment company of their size, it
strikes me as odd that they seem to mostly "wing it". There's no apparent (or
at least nothing they make public) structure and no real or apparent
analytical process that goes into their application process. I'm sure they do
have a process, but you can glean a lot and read between the lines on those
rejection emails that give very little evidence as to their actual decision
making process. It's probably opaque for a reason, right?

I've had friends who literally have gone through them multiple times, taken
their money, and failed with multiple different business ideas, that, on their
face were both poor ideas and poorly executed. Only to see them get accepted
again. Your chances of being accepted greatly increase if you know them
personally, or went to MIT/Stanford and part of that crowd. The other case is
where you are part of their current focus and just happen to get lucky. What
they fund and are interested in seems to change based on their moods and
personal interests more than any overall strategy that is more complex than a
blog post.

You're far better, at this point, to simply take on debt. With that revenue
you could qualify for a loan from any number of banks. Most banks have a small
business division and would be very eager to start working with you. Just go
in with your current Stripe dashboard and a simple plan of what you'd spend
the money on (marketing, development, etc). It doesn't need to (and shouldn't)
be complicated, a single page is enough. More than likely, you'll be offered
many different types of financing and the terms are almost guaranteed to be
better than any VC could offer. If they decline you, they'll give you directly
actionable requirements, which, once you've full-filled you can re-apply and
they will give you the money as long as you have met those requirements.
Unlike a VC, who may have been out the night before drinking and simply
decline you for no other reason than their own hangover. Banks make their
money in interest, they want to lend you money, they stay out of your
business. They do not make money by holding a percentage of your company
hostage and pumping up the value (real or imaginary) and then selling to the
next guy (which is exactly how a VC operates).

Or look for funding and mentorship in the software community in which you are
operating -- from Adobe or one of the other video editing software companies.
Start attending conferences attended by people in the video production
industry. You might be able to find a niche for your product in a large video
production company that could optimize their process or save on licensing
costs. One or two of those deals is really all you need.

And the value of the YC network is greatly overstated. If you're building
anything other than run-of-the-mill SaaS software, it's almost useless. They
can give you money, but they can't write code for you or (in my experience
working with other VC's) help you with recruiting, beyond having someone send
out blind emails on LinkedIn and adding you to their jobs page.

~~~
Gibbon1
> With that revenue you could qualify for a loan from any number of banks.

I'm not reading the rest of this thread but going to say in the hierarchy of
raising funds in order best to worst.

    
    
       1. Bank Loan.
       2. Angel Investor. 
       3. Venture Capital.
    

Venture Capital should be ones absolute last resort. Almost to the point if
you need VC money consider doing something else.

~~~
jaxn
4\. Private Equity 5\. Your parents' retirement account

~~~
Gibbon1
Since we're digging.

6\. Israeli Mafia.

------
dreamer7
Off topic, but I really like their blog site. Seems very similar to Medium.
Does anyone know if they used a template or blogging platform with custom
domain?

~~~
ignoramous
It's [https://ghost.org](https://ghost.org) in its default template.

------
newguy1234
I don't know why you tech/software startups fight so hard to get funding. Just
self-fund it and keep your equity for yourself. If your idea has potential,
you should be fighting to keep as much equity as possible, not selling it off
to the lowest bidder - VC firms. Only go to VC firms as last option as in
literally the startup will die if it doesn't get funding.

The bigger value proposition I see from Y Combinator is simply the networking
and community. A lot of the advice I see given during startup school is spot
on from my experience.

~~~
habitue
Some businesses lend themselves to bootstrapping, others are just straight up
capital intensive. Others are somewhere in between, and venture capital just
allows you to "skip ahead" and find out how good the idea really is by scaling
it and hiring people to polish it and make it run well instead of on a
shoestring budget.

------
foobarbecue
I had to Google MAU, and MRR. Monthly Active Users, Monthly Recurring Revenue.
(Couldn't you just say users access revenue on this case?)

------
craze3
You posted the same exact article 4 months ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20224157](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20224157)

I was rejected too, so I feel your pain. But come on... This is such a low-
effort post. It seems like all you did was update it with 1 paragraph saying
"we got rejected again." What's the point? Why does this belong on HN?

~~~
tnolet
It’s content marketing and according to the 150+ comments people still find
the story worthwhile.

~~~
craze3
How would you like if everyone kept submitting their old blog posts over and
over again?

Do you genuinely believe that would lead to a community of great content ?

~~~
tnolet
They will fly off the homepage quicker than you can say “repost”

------
erikig
Awesome effort and thanks for sharing the ups and downs. Quick question - why
aren't you guys on mobile yet?

~~~
sabbakeynejad
Canvas touch events, we just got them working, mobile will be live in 2 weeks
max.

------
tapatio
Meh, YC is so 2010.

