Applications open for the summer 2014 YC batch(ycombinator.com)
ycombinator.com
Applications open for the summer 2014 YC batch
http://ycombinator.com/apply.html?s2014
93 comments
Nice! That reminds me of...
"Tis a lesson you should heed,
If at first you don't succeed,
Try, try again;" - W. E. Hickson
Our 14% acceptance rate makes the most appropriate title "How not to get into Y Combinator."
But yeah, if you get an interview (you're already doing pretty well!), the 42Floors founders practice interview is the best training you can get for it.
But yeah, if you get an interview (you're already doing pretty well!), the 42Floors founders practice interview is the best training you can get for it.
Good! We'll be doing it again. To anyone that gets an interview invitation, contact me at @jasonfreedman and we'll be happy to do a mock-interview. Several alumni did mocks for us when we were applying and we found it massively helpful.
I can say without any doubt in my mind, without Jason's advice and the mock interview he took me through, I would not have been accepted into YC.
Nothing else will be as helpful as a mock interview. Jason's advice is on point, direct, and helpful. He's probably as close as you get to the real thing.
Nothing else will be as helpful as a mock interview. Jason's advice is on point, direct, and helpful. He's probably as close as you get to the real thing.
Sanders, that is quite an inspiring story. I wonder if all your six tries are for the same startup, or do you actually changed your ideas during these six times.
3 Good Karma - democratizing corporate philanthropy
2 Backspac.es - mobile photo storytelling
1 Beacon - fund a writer, read everything on the platform
2 Backspac.es - mobile photo storytelling
1 Beacon - fund a writer, read everything on the platform
Great persistence.
when you reapplied with the same startup, how much did you tweak the idea or was it mostly just a change of interview strategy? In other words, why did you reapply thinking that you will have have a better chance to get in than last time?
Good Karma was evolving from idea to actual product with people involved. We still had full time jobs while working on this and never got an interview.
Backspaces went from 1,000 users (first application) to 60,000 users in the 6 months since we'd first applied. We worked on this full time and we got an interview the second time.
We re-applied along the way because we had progressed and gotten better at everything each time. We never even got an interview until 5th or 6th time.
Note: If you somehow get face time with one of the partners and you impress them, you will likely get an interview. We made that happen and then got an interview.
Backspaces went from 1,000 users (first application) to 60,000 users in the 6 months since we'd first applied. We worked on this full time and we got an interview the second time.
We re-applied along the way because we had progressed and gotten better at everything each time. We never even got an interview until 5th or 6th time.
Note: If you somehow get face time with one of the partners and you impress them, you will likely get an interview. We made that happen and then got an interview.
Sometimes the best thing you can do is inspire people to do great things and with people like this in our community it's hard not to be inspired.
Although I haven't made it into YC yet I would definitely love to help anyone out even if it just means sharing my thoughts about your idea/startup :)
Shoot me an email @ [email protected] or [email protected]
Although I haven't made it into YC yet I would definitely love to help anyone out even if it just means sharing my thoughts about your idea/startup :)
Shoot me an email @ [email protected] or [email protected]
I reached out to Adrian right after he posted and he's already helped me with CameraLends.com. I'd recommend the rest of you reach out to him!
Six times? Really? At some point it becomes pathetic, you know. Though portrayed as, yc isn't some sort of holy grail you have to touch before death. But six times, man, that must have been three years at least? Props for not giving up. Still pathetic though.
Hah, I guess it could be construed as pathetic. But we never looked at YC as the gatekeeper to whether we worked on our projects.
The best thing about startups is you don't need YC to make it happen. You need to work on something you and others find valuable that you're willing to work your ass off for.
Maybe others get in on their first try, and are clearly more able, capable, or validated than me, but that's not really how I gauge why I do things. Neither is getting rejected.
I'm the first to admit that I'm not nearly the smartest person to ever apply to YC. Hell I'm probably one of the dumbest. But there's no reason not to apply. The only downside is getting the rejection letter (and the free mixpanel credits). The upside, at least so far in my experience, has been well worth it.
The best thing about startups is you don't need YC to make it happen. You need to work on something you and others find valuable that you're willing to work your ass off for.
Maybe others get in on their first try, and are clearly more able, capable, or validated than me, but that's not really how I gauge why I do things. Neither is getting rejected.
I'm the first to admit that I'm not nearly the smartest person to ever apply to YC. Hell I'm probably one of the dumbest. But there's no reason not to apply. The only downside is getting the rejection letter (and the free mixpanel credits). The upside, at least so far in my experience, has been well worth it.
Pathetic is the perfect way to describe me.
Especially when you factor in that as an immigrant I had to leave America 3 times, once because I was diagnosed with cancer, and haven't legally been able to take salary from my own company in 2 years.
Especially when you factor in that as an immigrant I had to leave America 3 times, once because I was diagnosed with cancer, and haven't legally been able to take salary from my own company in 2 years.
zmitri, i upvoted but sometimes words are needed - keep up the good work!
Wil Chung holds the record at 7 last I checked. I actually have a huge amount of respect for him for being so persistent. If I were an investor that'd be the thing I look for first.
Wtf is pathetic about that.
Try out 1000 of things, do a pivot, pitch investors here and there, apply YC every now and then. Nothing pathetic about that.
Try out 1000 of things, do a pivot, pitch investors here and there, apply YC every now and then. Nothing pathetic about that.
You are making the assumption that simply because they applied 6 times means they must've been obsessed with getting into YC. That doesn't have to be the case - it's not hard to imagine someone trying various startups deciding that it's worth a shot each time.
zmitri's reply is the only reason I'm not down-voting this.
You're getting downvoted for slagging someone, but the real reason your comment should be invisible grey is that very few people with your attitude succeed in business. Every company operator I know has a story to tell about handling months or even years of rejection.
Check their comment history. Haters gonna hate.
[deleted]
We (Lollipuff, W13) released our entire application along with the short video [1]. I personally think that looking at a few sample applications is/was super helpful.
I also share SandersAK's opinion: just writing a YC application will force you to think about the "right things" for your business. It's a worthy exercise in its own right.
[1] https://www.lollipuff.com/blog/102/lollipuffs-ycombinator-ex...
EDIT: Awww! I just saw our old MVP screenshots on that blog post. Lollipuff has come a long way since then...
I also share SandersAK's opinion: just writing a YC application will force you to think about the "right things" for your business. It's a worthy exercise in its own right.
[1] https://www.lollipuff.com/blog/102/lollipuffs-ycombinator-ex...
EDIT: Awww! I just saw our old MVP screenshots on that blog post. Lollipuff has come a long way since then...
So stoked for you guys. I watched you guys apply and get rejected each time. And then emerge more determined. It felt obvious to me not only that you would get in, but that you would be one of the startups most likely to succeed.
And now you're proving me right. Which rocks.
And now you're proving me right. Which rocks.
Thanks Jason, seriously we owe you so many beers. "when" not "if" is how we operate ;)
Thanks man, that's generous of you!
Excited to almost apply again!
Is this the "next batch" that sama will be presiding over? Or is the batch after this one? http://blog.ycombinator.com/sam-altman-for-president
Is YC still doing 'no idea' applications?
No, we stopped taking those several batches ago.
Does this mean that the concept proved unsuccessful?
Yeah. There weren't many no-idea applications and on the whole they weren't good. One batch I forgot to enable them, and we just let them stay dead.
should i apply ? am from Nigeria .. Thanks
This will be my first time applying. Both very excited and very nervous.
Good luck!
Is it just me, or is the "Request for Startups"[1] page in serious need of updating?
For example, are "Things Built on Twitter"[2] and "iPad Applications"[3] still a valid way to build a $XX billion company in today's world?
[1] http://ycombinator.com/rfs.html
[2] http://ycombinator.com/rfs3.html
[3] http://ycombinator.com/rfs6.html
For example, are "Things Built on Twitter"[2] and "iPad Applications"[3] still a valid way to build a $XX billion company in today's world?
[1] http://ycombinator.com/rfs.html
[2] http://ycombinator.com/rfs3.html
[3] http://ycombinator.com/rfs6.html
[deleted]
iPad Applications definitely are. In the non-gaming world, Plangrid, drchrono, and Paper by Fiftythree have all been really successful, and that's just off the top of my head.
I'm applying to the summer batch, and I just noticed my company may fit into an RFS. Anybody have experience applying with RFS? Would it be better to just apply without it, and let YC make the connection?
Have any African countries ever applied or been accepted to YC?
Will people that plan to move back home or have home (non American) markets as their primary markets be considered?
It would be interesting to see how Sama's batch differs from PG's
Will people that plan to move back home or have home (non American) markets as their primary markets be considered?
It would be interesting to see how Sama's batch differs from PG's
Will people that plan to move back home or have home (non American) markets as their primary markets be considered?
Many have done this, whether planned or not I don't know in all cases, but I know that Glio has Brazil as their primary market.
Many have done this, whether planned or not I don't know in all cases, but I know that Glio has Brazil as their primary market.
No African countries have applied or been accepted, but we've accepted several people from them. IIRC none were making things for specifically African markets though.
We're certainly willing to fund companies building stuff for their home country and that will return to it after YC. GoCardless is probably the most prominent.
We're certainly willing to fund companies building stuff for their home country and that will return to it after YC. GoCardless is probably the most prominent.
This raises an interesting question: should a country applying to YC use the regular application form or the nonprofit one?
Here's my application for the last batch:
https://www.penflip.com/loren/yc-application
Wasn't accepted, but it might help anyway.
If anyone's curious, no, I didn't lose all hope and give up when YC rejected me. Third time being rejected, and it hurts less every time :) Still going strong on this idea, refuse to quit.
https://www.penflip.com/loren/yc-application
Wasn't accepted, but it might help anyway.
If anyone's curious, no, I didn't lose all hope and give up when YC rejected me. Third time being rejected, and it hurts less every time :) Still going strong on this idea, refuse to quit.
[deleted]
When I applied for YC, the application itself was very valuable because it asked focused and aspirational questions which forced me to think about what I was trying to create and why it was important to other people. I also went into the process telling myself that while it would be great to get in, it was not the end of the world if it didn't work out.
Remember that the success of your product/company ultimately comes down to you and the market you are in and not necessarily the money that is invested or the often nebulous social status that might come with getting into such programs. What matters is creating something which is of service to and valuable to other people.
Remember that the success of your product/company ultimately comes down to you and the market you are in and not necessarily the money that is invested or the often nebulous social status that might come with getting into such programs. What matters is creating something which is of service to and valuable to other people.
When we interviewed for the current cohort, we were asked to show up early for the interview, so I travelled to Mountain View each of the 6 interview days to talk to other startups. As a canuck in the valley for the first time, it was an eye-opening experience.
It's really interesting to hear what everyone is working on, and it's a rare look at the YC investment thesis. Also interesting to see what these companies have gone on to achieve, YC or not. I was most inspired by the stories of everyone who had travelled from foreign countries to pitch.
It's really interesting to hear what everyone is working on, and it's a rare look at the YC investment thesis. Also interesting to see what these companies have gone on to achieve, YC or not. I was most inspired by the stories of everyone who had travelled from foreign countries to pitch.
We don't recommend applicants do this. Though we don't say anything when it happens, we do notice, and it makes us slightly less likely to accept such groups.
What is the policy on applications for businesses that compete with existing YC companies?
Do you accept them? Do you have conflict of interest or confidentiality policies?
Do you ever have conversations with existing YC companies along the lines of "We had an application recently for product X, you should do that."?
Do you accept them? Do you have conflict of interest or confidentiality policies?
Do you ever have conversations with existing YC companies along the lines of "We had an application recently for product X, you should do that."?
The YC FAQ answers the first three: http://ycombinator.com/faq.html
As for the fourth, of course not.
As for the fourth, of course not.
Since YC alumni are now doing the preliminary application reviews, is there a process to avoid an unintentional conflict of interest (ie, an alumnus viewing a potential competitor's application)? Perhaps prescreening by YC staff and assignment to specific alumni for review?
Please forgive me if the question seems redundant. I am reluctant to even ask as YC has a reputation of integrity. However, the mantra that "ideas are worthless" causes concern that perhaps precautions might not be taken to avoid such a scenario (because by implication, it would seem this could be viewed as a non-event). My apologies if I have misunderstood the views of YC on the matter.
Please forgive me if the question seems redundant. I am reluctant to even ask as YC has a reputation of integrity. However, the mantra that "ideas are worthless" causes concern that perhaps precautions might not be taken to avoid such a scenario (because by implication, it would seem this could be viewed as a non-event). My apologies if I have misunderstood the views of YC on the matter.
From what I have been told by YC alum the assignment process for application review is randomized, meaning it is hypothetically possible that a direct competitor may read your application.
As a counter point, if you want to raise external funding, you probably should accept the fact you will likely have to share your idea without protection - as its unlikely any VC will sign an NDA, and you have no idea who they will push your pitch deck to in order to get a 2nd opinion.
As a counter point, if you want to raise external funding, you probably should accept the fact you will likely have to share your idea without protection - as its unlikely any VC will sign an NDA, and you have no idea who they will push your pitch deck to in order to get a 2nd opinion.
We tell the alumni explicitly that they're obliged not to disclose what they see in applications, and that if they see an application that competes with them they should click on the "skip" button provided for this purpose. We can't watch over their shoulder as they do it, but we're careful about which alumni we pick as reviewers, and there has never been any problem so far.
That seems reasonable. Thank you for the explanation.
"How far along are you? Do you have a beta yet? If not, when will you? Are you launched? If so, how many users do you have? Do you have revenue? If so, how much? If you're launched, what is your monthly growth rate (in users or revenue or both)?"
The above question popped out at me this year.
I don't know a lot about the groups that YC accepts, except what I read in the occasional press-release or HN post. But I have noticed a pattern: it seems that many (and perhaps most?) of the YC companies I've read about recently had already launched and found success prior to YC, sometimes years prior.
This pattern might only indicate that I'm reading about those kinds of YC startups, and that completely new companies that launched post-YC don't get as much of my attention.
Nonetheless, I've found this pattern to be at odds with what I thought YC was about — pre-launch investment and mentoring of brand new companies.
It makes sense to invest in people and companies that have already found success. Even if such companies pivot to something completely new, they have a track record and a user base to work from.
Has YC made an informal pivot itself, to funding companies that have already launched and found traction rather than in great teams of founders that probably aren't even incorporated yet?
The above question popped out at me this year.
I don't know a lot about the groups that YC accepts, except what I read in the occasional press-release or HN post. But I have noticed a pattern: it seems that many (and perhaps most?) of the YC companies I've read about recently had already launched and found success prior to YC, sometimes years prior.
This pattern might only indicate that I'm reading about those kinds of YC startups, and that completely new companies that launched post-YC don't get as much of my attention.
Nonetheless, I've found this pattern to be at odds with what I thought YC was about — pre-launch investment and mentoring of brand new companies.
It makes sense to invest in people and companies that have already found success. Even if such companies pivot to something completely new, they have a track record and a user base to work from.
Has YC made an informal pivot itself, to funding companies that have already launched and found traction rather than in great teams of founders that probably aren't even incorporated yet?
Some of this was discussed last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7253977
There's a well known and clearly visible trend that more institutional (i.e. not friends and family) investment is moving later stage for "normal" software businesses.
The reasons are well known: the cost of developing software (at least the initial prototype) have dropped far enough that a great many people can afford to build a prototype themselves.
Further, the cost of market validation has also dropped enough such that a great many companies can achieve some market validation without outside capital.
Put together, it's a reasonable expectation that a dedicated entrepreneur will put in both the minimal time and money to both build a prototype and prove that real customers exist who view the solution as valuable.
However, the cost of building a big business is still high. Specifically, ramping up development, hosting, marketing (team and spend), sales, etc. still costs enough money that outside capital helps.
This last point is key and answers the question of "why would I raise capital if I did all of the work of building a prototype and getting my initial customers?".
Lastly, the ultimate goal is to succeed. There are a number of different paths to success, but one of the worst failures is not outright failure of a company.
If you think about the possible outcomes of a business, there are basically 3:
1. Complete failure...business shuts down
2. Moderate success...$2 million, $5 million up to maybe $25 million
3. Success... $25 million plus with the ultimate goal of doing 9 or 10 figures a year
#1 sucks. Maybe more without venture capital as its your money you lost, but it's good in no way.
#3 is great whether or not you get venture financing. Depending on your financing, you'll walk away with $5 million or more personally.
#2 can either be a wonderful success, or the worst failure (worse than #1). #2 is great if you bootstrapped. If you bootstrapped, you'll walk away with $5 million or more in your pocket. If you grow to $10M+ in revenue, then you're financially free.
However, #2 sucks if you raised significant capital. Most likely, you hate the company because you'll walk away will nothing even though the company has had some success. Investors will hate the company because the investment is sucking up time, focus and will never be a winner.
In this light, waiting to raise capital until a company is a little bit more mature is a boon for entrepreneurs. If you have a #1 then kill it and move onto the next opportunity. If you have a #3, then go raise (or don't).
But, if you have a #2 then you know you can get rich by bootstrapping, which will prevent you from making the mistake of raising capital for a non-venture fundable business.
The reasons are well known: the cost of developing software (at least the initial prototype) have dropped far enough that a great many people can afford to build a prototype themselves.
Further, the cost of market validation has also dropped enough such that a great many companies can achieve some market validation without outside capital.
Put together, it's a reasonable expectation that a dedicated entrepreneur will put in both the minimal time and money to both build a prototype and prove that real customers exist who view the solution as valuable.
However, the cost of building a big business is still high. Specifically, ramping up development, hosting, marketing (team and spend), sales, etc. still costs enough money that outside capital helps.
This last point is key and answers the question of "why would I raise capital if I did all of the work of building a prototype and getting my initial customers?".
Lastly, the ultimate goal is to succeed. There are a number of different paths to success, but one of the worst failures is not outright failure of a company.
If you think about the possible outcomes of a business, there are basically 3:
1. Complete failure...business shuts down
2. Moderate success...$2 million, $5 million up to maybe $25 million
3. Success... $25 million plus with the ultimate goal of doing 9 or 10 figures a year
#1 sucks. Maybe more without venture capital as its your money you lost, but it's good in no way.
#3 is great whether or not you get venture financing. Depending on your financing, you'll walk away with $5 million or more personally.
#2 can either be a wonderful success, or the worst failure (worse than #1). #2 is great if you bootstrapped. If you bootstrapped, you'll walk away with $5 million or more in your pocket. If you grow to $10M+ in revenue, then you're financially free.
However, #2 sucks if you raised significant capital. Most likely, you hate the company because you'll walk away will nothing even though the company has had some success. Investors will hate the company because the investment is sucking up time, focus and will never be a winner.
In this light, waiting to raise capital until a company is a little bit more mature is a boon for entrepreneurs. If you have a #1 then kill it and move onto the next opportunity. If you have a #3, then go raise (or don't).
But, if you have a #2 then you know you can get rich by bootstrapping, which will prevent you from making the mistake of raising capital for a non-venture fundable business.
There's a well known and clearly visible trend that more institutional (i.e. not friends and family) investment is moving later stage for "normal" software businesses.
Actually the trend in the venture business is actually the opposite. The biggest change in the last few years has been the increase in pre-series A investments, both by "super-angels" (which are structurally mini VC funds) and existing VC firms.
Actually the trend in the venture business is actually the opposite. The biggest change in the last few years has been the increase in pre-series A investments, both by "super-angels" (which are structurally mini VC funds) and existing VC firms.
Hi pg, thanks for the reply.
I may have done a poor job of wording as I used the word stage which has a specific meaning. What I meant was the first investment (seed) has moved from idea stage to prototype.
With the clarification, do you think it is accurate?
I may have done a poor job of wording as I used the word stage which has a specific meaning. What I meant was the first investment (seed) has moved from idea stage to prototype.
With the clarification, do you think it is accurate?
I haven't noticed any change. We've always hoped people would at least make some sort of prototype. That's how one explores ideas, or at least ideas about software.
We've had already launched companies applying almost since the beginning of YC. Airbnb, which was in the winter 2009 batch, had been launched for over a year.
We make a conscious effort not to be influenced by early progress though, because there is no correlation between how far along a company is when they apply to YC and how well they end up doing.
We make a conscious effort not to be influenced by early progress though, because there is no correlation between how far along a company is when they apply to YC and how well they end up doing.
We make a conscious effort not to be influenced by early progress though, because there is no correlation between how far along a company is when they apply to YC and how well they end up doing.
Given how many reapplications YC gets, it seems that it should only invest in companies it thinks would do so well in the next 6 months that they won't apply in the next round.
If YC is getting fewer misses on companies that are rejected but go on to do well, how much of that do you ascribe to the selection process and how much do you ascribe to YC's increasing ability to get multiple passes at startups?
Given how many reapplications YC gets, it seems that it should only invest in companies it thinks would do so well in the next 6 months that they won't apply in the next round.
If YC is getting fewer misses on companies that are rejected but go on to do well, how much of that do you ascribe to the selection process and how much do you ascribe to YC's increasing ability to get multiple passes at startups?
How many non-profits does YC hope to fund in this cycle? Is Watsi the only public example?
Zidisha and Immunity Project have both launched publicly from this current W2014 batch. There are more.
Also, we don't set quotas at YC. If we think your non-profit would be a good fit for YC, we'll accept you.
Also, we don't set quotas at YC. If we think your non-profit would be a good fit for YC, we'll accept you.
Come on, hat trick of rejections!
On April 15, we'll invite the groups that seem most promising to meet us in Mountain View between April 24 and 28 ----
-- This is too less time for companies based outside of the US to arrange cheap tickets, visas etc.
-- This is too less time for companies based outside of the US to arrange cheap tickets, visas etc.
How much does it hurt your application if you apply as a sole founder?
I got an interview as a sole founder in the S13 batch so it's not impossible. Have a working product, or progress, to show you can make stuff happen despite being on your own probably helps.
[deleted](3)
Practical question: Are we supposed to submit only one form per group or multiple? Because the introductory explanation talks about a group submission, but on the form itself there are fields that are explicitly personal: e.g. "Please tell us about the time you, fedor91, most successfully hacked..."
Addendum: If there are any noob mistakes you want to point out, I'd very much appreciate it because it's the first time we're applying.
Addendum: If there are any noob mistakes you want to point out, I'd very much appreciate it because it's the first time we're applying.
Echoing other YC people: More than happy to help with reading over applications and giving feedback! [email protected]
Along the way we learned a lot about why YC is important, what it does for you (and what it doesn't) and why the application process is one of the best ways to think through creating your startup.
We've been really lucky to have great alumni help advise us and give us feedback on our applications (yes, all of six of them, thanks Jason Freedman!).
So hit me up if you want me to look over anything, it's the least I can do: [email protected]
EDIT - I may be slow on the reply until after demo day ;)