
Applying to YC - hglaser
http://blog.samaltman.com/applying-to-yc
======
btrautsc
\- didn't get in first time (check, different company though). \- weren't sure
if good fit for b2b/ saas company (wrong). \- questioned how much value YC
could provide us (many times more than expected).

for us going through YC, working with the partners, and joining the YC network
were the best things we could have possibly done.

Thinking back to life pre-YC (Dec-13) to now the rate of change (progress/
growth/ knowledge) is unreal.

~~~
yousifa
hey Brian, just messaged you in linkedin, want to ask some questions if you
have some time

-Yousif

~~~
idlewords
You better call him and let him know you posted this comment.

~~~
raldi
Or just write to the email address in his profile.

------
oretoz
Sam's comments are encouraging but in the notes [1] about the application
process they also mention how they look at a user's comments.

I signed up on HN after being a passive reader for a long time and so haven't
accumulated a lot of karma.

I suppose lack of comments shouldn't be a deterrent as Sam suggested but may
be the messaging needs to change a bit? Just my humble opinion.

[1]
[https://www.ycombinator.com/howtoapply/](https://www.ycombinator.com/howtoapply/)

~~~
sama
most partners don't look at this very much.

~~~
oretoz
That is great to know. I had mistakenly assumed that it is one of the key
requirements. I am in my late 30s and will be soon starting on my startup
journey. Having worked with a big telecom vendor for a large part of my
career, I sometimes make the mistake of finding reasons why I cannot start a
venture. I suppose it is time for a real change. Whether I go for YC or not
this year (I live in the UK and cannot leave in the near future for personal
reasons), I am surely going to give this whole startup thing a good kick in
the coming days!

Thanks all.

------
wellboy
I think the post tries to encourage more people to start startups and to apply
to YC, however, I think the way this post is formulated, it gives the
impression that if you have a good idea you can simply apply, which I don't
think is true at all. I think it would be really helpful to write that people
should only apply to YC if they either have a track record or traction.
Criterion 1 is Track record consists of these three things

1\. Built/sold something impressive before

2\. Worked at Facebook or Google

3\. Graduated from Stanford

Criterion 2 is traction, which is either 10.000 users for consumer or $5.000
revenue for B2B after 6 months.

In summary, if the founder does not have a track record as described above or
strong traction, she/he is very unlikely to get into YC. Explaining this will
prevent people without a track record from thinking that they only have to
have a good idea, because if you don't have a track record you need a really
good idea with a huge market and traction to get in. I don't think many
founders realise that.

I might be wrong, so I would love for others to critizise or add to my
comment. I would love to hear about examples for instance, of a recent startup
where the founders neither had a track record, nor traction.

~~~
atom-morgan
In terms of meeting your requirements, Ryan Hoover is a perfect example. I
don't believe he'd sold a startup before, he isn't an ex-Facebook or Google
employee, and he didn't go to Stanford. I'd randomly found him on Twitter
roughly a year ago and suddenly I read a TechCrunch article about how a
product he'd made is in YC. He came out of nowhere, so to speak.

~~~
wellboy
He is hitting hard the second criterion with hundreds of thousands of
visitors. It is either track record, or traction. Traction trumps everything
:)

~~~
yeukhon
Which to me, is the most fairest way to sell your idea to YC. If you have an
idea people actually want and you have some work done, sell it. But the other
two are certainly true. You are from Stanford, you probably can leverage some
connections outside of YC.

------
TheMakeA
Good post but I wish there was more transparency in what YC was looking for
(though I understand this is difficult, otherwise people would game it).

There are companies that are accepted with just an idea and companies with six
figure revenues that are rejected. There are founders with bad ideas that are
"funded for the pivot," and founders like Drew Houston who are rejected
because their initial idea was bad.

It just seems kind of random.

~~~
ryanSrich
I think a lot of it has to do with who you are and then what you have coming
in (in terms of a product).

So for example. If you're a Stanford grad, have already started and exited a
company and now are a part-time VC, you can probably get into YC with just an
idea. (similar to Standard Treasury).

Alternatively if you've not made a name for yourself yet it's likely YC would
look for something already built, with users, and possibly revenue.

This is obviously pure speculation.

~~~
zt
(1) Neither Dan or I went to Stanford.

(2) Dan and I are part-time angels really, with very small checks given to a
very small number of companies. Also, as sama mentioned, we basically stopped
investing at all once we got into YC. We still make an investment from time-
to-time but mostly in people we know already. We don't have meetings, way too
busy on Standard Treasury.

(3) We felt like an underdog when we applied to YC. I think we were underdogs
when we applied! We didn't know them and certainly didn't have much of a
reputation outside of financial technology (still don't?). We felt very
fortunate when we got in. YC was amazing for us and has always been supportive
of our mild madness.

~~~
ryanSrich
For sure.

And my comment wasn't meant to come off as "these are exactly the things
Standard Treasury did to get in". It was more of a comparison of the type of
founders YC would look for in a product that is still in the initial idea
phase. So thanks for clearing that up.

The angel thing is actually interesting to me. You don't think that had any
weight on YC's decision to admit you guys? To me it would seem like someone
who could clearly support themselves financially enough to be an angel would
be an ideal candidate as a founder...but I'm not an investor so I have no idea
if these things are good or bad.

~~~
outericky
As sama answered above (below?) Angel investing is likely not going to help
your cause. If you are already successful to the point that you have enough
financial viability, then it's a lot easier to walk away from something that
isn't working. Which is bad for YC. Scrappy founders will work their butt off
before hanging it up. That said. Financially successful or not, great founders
(2nd time, 3rd time) and a great product/company, is what will likely get you
in.

------
gault8121
That's great to see. How many YC companies apply multiple times and are
accepted in a later batch?

~~~
sama
a lot--i updated the post to reflect this.

~~~
gault8121
Cool thanks for the response. We're looking forward to getting in our
nonprofit app.

------
skizm
I think people say they are "too early" because they feel that don't have the
resume to get accepted. They feel like if they could only get user traction
before applying you might over look our mediocre grades, work history, and
personal projects. We've evaluated our own YC resumes and found they come up
short. I don't think there are too many people out there who have a killer
project and/or super smart founders that are hesitant to apply because they
genuinely think their company is in too early of a stage.

------
genbit
Almost in every YC related article mentioned about at least 2 founders. What
about startups with 1 founder, what chances are, any advices?

~~~
randall
As a solo founder from the w14 batch: I can tell you it feels more difficult
to do everything yourself. I'd recommend if you can organically find someone
to work with on the company, you should.

Happy to answer any solo founder related questions, if you have them.

~~~
genbit
Yea, I know that it's much better if you have cofounder (there are so many
tasks to do), but I believe it should be the right person, and wrong person
can make much more damage then help.

As a solo founder, how did you improve your productivity on early stage: what
kind of tasks you usually delegated to someone else (like freelancer) if you
did.

~~~
randall
I had a cofounder who split about 3 months before, but he wasn't full-time and
hadn't contributed any code in the months leading up to it.

I had hired a sales guy _right_ before yc, which helped somewhat. During yc, I
basically bounced between growth tasks which was really difficult. I'm still
figuring it out tbh.

We now have a larger team which helps a lot... But I still often miss the
camaraderie of having someone who 100% has your back.

The other thing is a sense of impostor syndrome to fight against... I feel
like I don't have anyone who will see a bigger picture totally, so I find
myself doubting my decisions much more frequently.

~~~
CodeDiver
So glad you're open to solo-founder questions, thank a bunch. In your
experience, do you think that you might just have unreasonably high standards
for partners compared to people who have successfully matched with cofounders?

Would love to share the climb with a co-founder. Outreach efforts have put me
in touch with smart, creative, educated people in the Bay Area. But to my
surprise, I just haven't met a truly gritty, determined person yet. Started
projects with the people I found anyways. It always feels like playing tea
party with stuffed animals. Not a good experience for them, or me.

These lovely people live pleasant, balanced, healthy, entertaining, lives.
Bless them. Nothing wrong with that! But they don't have crazy drive. Don't
wanna run circles around a partner in any project. Want a cofounder to be my
equal or superior in energy and persistence, that we can chase each other's
effort, enhance each other's growth/success, and the project's growth/success.

I don't want a pampered, entertaining life. I want to struggle, grow, learn,
achieve. Not sure how to find partners to share those values with. Should I
make sure that partners share those values, or are these criteria
unreasonable/misguided?

Flying solo for now. Later, maybe self-made success on a larger scale/stage
may draw special people to me, so I don't have to actively search. A co-
founder isn't a necessity for me, just a highly desired and recommended
luxury, if I can reasonably get one. When a commenter above said, in
paraphrase, "Going solo isn't impossible, you just need to be four times
better", I just think "Fine, I'll work to get there."

Am I doing it wrong? Right? Sound familiar or was your co-founder-less
situation different?

------
yousifa
Sam/Paul, what is the most important thing you look for in a hardware startup
(that is not also shared with software startups)?

~~~
paul
In general, there aren't any differences. We're looking for people who can
create something that people will want. For hardware companies, that will
likely require some hardware skills, so show us that you have what it takes to
ship whatever it is that you are building. You should also have a good
understanding of how much capital will be required to ship your v1, as that
will often be an issue if you're actually manufacturing something.

------
lordnacho1980
I've got a startup with an almost ready product, a team that has started
businesses before, and is bootstrapped with our own money. I'd love to give a
presentation, but I'm based in Europe. Does YC do Europe? (I'm more than happy
to fly. Question is whether you care where a firm is based.)

~~~
dirktheman
There's a FAQ-section you might want to read, as it specifically mentions
location. They don't care where you're based, but you do have to follow the YC
program in the US. After YC, you could return to Europe, but it's probably a
good idea to stick around. Provided you get a suitable visa, of course...
[http://www.ycombinator.com/faq/](http://www.ycombinator.com/faq/)

------
rmena123
What about the single founder? I know the answer, but I guess I shouldn't
apply til I find a co-founder?

~~~
paul
We have some very successful single-founder companies, such as Instacart. We
suggest finding a cofounder not for our benefit, but for your own. Startups
are hard, and doing it alone makes it even harder.

~~~
chacham15
pg has said multiple times that a major downfall of a lot of companies is that
the two founders have a dispute. What is the major downfall of companies with
single founders?

~~~
spigoon
Stamina.

------
rdlecler1
I noticed that the application asks for age of the founders. How does this
factor into the equation?

~~~
tlb
We ask founders what impressive things they've done: older founders have had
more time to do things.

I roughly take the quotient (amount of impressive achievements) / (age - 15).

~~~
amirmc
Is it a negative signal if you're older but still only find one or two things
you feel are 'impressive'? One of the things I noticed is that older founders
I've met wouldn't bother with YC because it's for 'young folks'.

------
penfold26
I did think of applying at some point but I actually thought of i may be too
late since i already have a product and growing revenue. I was under the
impression YC was just a seed accelerator. Thanks for clearing that up and
encouraging us to take a look again.

------
genbit
Thanks, I was going to apply, but had exactly these doubts, and you just gave
me more motivation.

------
shr42
The application process (like the thiel fellowship) itself teaches you a ton
about yourself and your business. Although we weren't accepted to either, I
came out a more insightful person (let's go round 2!).

------
amitaujla
I think it takes a certain degree of courageousness to pursue entrepreneurship
in the first place, and that shouldn't get dwindled down when applying to YC
as you have everything to gain and nothing to lose.

------
wmf
sama, I'm curious about how it works when YC invests in a company with
"millions of dollars raised"; do you still take 7% and if so how do you avoid
the appearance of a down round?

~~~
JoshTriplett
Someone looking at the investment history of a company isn't going to blindly
look at the number and say "down round"; they're going to look at the name "Y
Combinator".

~~~
tonysuper
And, presumably, get cartoon-style dollar signs in their eyes seconds
afterwards.

------
rmena123
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't YC for the Ivy League class type? The "I
dropped out cause I am smart" type? The "I wrote a book on _____" type? "I
worked at Google or Facebook" type? What about the regular type that doesn't
have much to show, but wants to do great things?

Basically, I feel like the YC application is a pissing match of who can piss
the farthest shown on paper not outside. haha :)

I have realized I don't fit the YC type.. so I won't apply.

~~~
amirmc
What gives you this impression? From what I can tell (from the outside) YC is
a pretty diverse crowd and I believe PG once said that academic background
doesn't much matter. Grit (aka resilience, determination, relentlessness, etc)
is more important.

In fact, there's nothing in the application form that even asks about
education (there used to be but maybe it moved to the additional founder info
- i.e it doesn't seem important at all).

~~~
Qworg
I think this impression is pervasive (at least amongst my friends). It would
be great to highlight founders who have gotten into YC who don't "fit the
mold" so to speak. Most, if not all, of the "check out my winning YC
application" posts have multiple Ivy League/Stanford founders, advantageous
childhoods, etc. Add to that the same posts have "multiple people who are YC
alums read, edited, and/or vetted our application" and you can see how that
impression can spread.

~~~
nostrademons
I think one of the critical skills for a startup founder is to ignore the
general impression and find out yourself what the actual reality is.

Another critical skill is the ability, when somebody else is confused by their
general preconceptions, to point out why your special case is different and
why they should abandon their general theories for the specific opportunity in
front of them.

YC might very well do the highlighting you mention - it's to their advantage
to draw as diverse an applicant pool as possible. However, in some ways this
misses the point. It doesn't disqualify you if you didn't get into Stanford,
Google, the Ivy League, etc. It does disqualify you if you think this is
important enough to disqualify you.

~~~
waterlesscloud
A critical skill for a startup incubator is reaching all the people who could
succeed and make them a ton of money.

That includes openly and directly addressing mis-impressions the talent pool
may have of who the incubator is looking for.

~~~
nostrademons
That's true, and that's why I said YC may very well want to highlight such
founders from disadvantaged backgrounds, if only for their own benefit.

However, I'm assuming that the YC partners are not going to be taking advice
from me just because I post on Hacker News. People thinking of applying to YC
might (hell, _I_ might). They can control _their_ actions, they can't control
YC's actions. Why not focus on what you can control? That's another critical
startup skill.

------
vishalzone2002
thanks for this! cleared so many clouds around applying.

------
rdlecler1
Refreshing.

