Thanks for posting this again, it's a good reminder.
I'm not applying, but I'd love any insight into how the process of reviewing applications has changed in the last few cycles.
1)
I know you have Harj on the west-coast, and Alexis on the East coast.. Has that made a difference in the way you review applications?
I know in the past, you've said that Harj was acting more as a back-end catchall, than a front-end filter. Is that still the process?
Are you having more pre-meetings on the east coast, now that Alexis is available to help screen people before their official interview?
2)
Do you expect (or have you seen) any change due to the Yuri Milner announcement?
2a)
Do you suspect this will encourage people to apply who might not have applied otherwise, due to needing more runway?
2b)
I know(suspect?) that a lot of the core assumptions of the YC application process are based around "you have to get things done in 3 months.."
This might lead you to reject projects that would take 6 months of work, even at YC-speed, to complete.
Does the Yuri Milner announcement affect this?
3) There's been a large growth in "YC-like" incubators/foundries/angel firms (TechStars being perhaps the most well known). How (if at all) have your procedures or operating assumptions changed, now that the world of funding is so different than it was in 2007?
The biggest change is in the volume of applications. We've dealt with it by getting more partners, and relying more on alumni reviewers.
BTW, Harj acts as a catch-all only for the late applications. He reads on-time applications just like the rest of us.
I don't know yet what effect the Ronco/Yuri announcement will have. It probably won't change how we rank applications.
All the other new YC-like organizations don't currently affect what we do at all, that I can think of. A while ago we complained because some of them were giving people exploding termsheets that expired before the recipients had a chance to come to their YC interview, but that practice seems to have stopped. Now everyone seems to coexist peacefully.
Do you know whether the new one month gap between YC acceptance and techstars acceptance will be a problem? E.G. Will the offers explode in a month? In not, when typically?
TechStars is running programs 5 times a year, so it's less relative anyway. According to http://www.techstars.org/schedule/ there is a batch of finalists notified one month on either side of the YC interviews.
I'm not applying, but I'd love any insight into how the process of reviewing applications has changed in the last few cycles.
1) I know you have Harj on the west-coast, and Alexis on the East coast.. Has that made a difference in the way you review applications?
I know in the past, you've said that Harj was acting more as a back-end catchall, than a front-end filter. Is that still the process?
Are you having more pre-meetings on the east coast, now that Alexis is available to help screen people before their official interview?
2) Do you expect (or have you seen) any change due to the Yuri Milner announcement?
2a) Do you suspect this will encourage people to apply who might not have applied otherwise, due to needing more runway?
2b) I know(suspect?) that a lot of the core assumptions of the YC application process are based around "you have to get things done in 3 months.." This might lead you to reject projects that would take 6 months of work, even at YC-speed, to complete.
Does the Yuri Milner announcement affect this?
3) There's been a large growth in "YC-like" incubators/foundries/angel firms (TechStars being perhaps the most well known). How (if at all) have your procedures or operating assumptions changed, now that the world of funding is so different than it was in 2007?