It's one of the social norms on HackerNews that "low-value" comments like "Love it! Thanks!" and "good job" are discouraged. Although such comments are polite to the commenter, they add nothing but noise for all the other readers of the thread.
Instead, it seems to be preferred that you simply upvote the comment instead of replying.
33% is way too low as a failure rate for pre-seed startups. I think that number may be around what you would expect for Series A startups. The data is skewed because class sizes have grown over time so the data is skewed towards younger companies.
Another factor is that it takes some time for a company to admit it failed, and everyone's opinion of "failed" is different. I suspect the actual number is higher, especially from an investors perspective.
I was shocked that it was that low. Even considering that another 20%+ are probably on life support, in denial, and/or destined for failure, that is an amazingly high success rate in startupland.
Agree. I would say the selection criteria for every program varies and each have their own strengths, but having the data around how many companies have failed should influence companies thinking about which program they should pursue.
You often can't find so much as a blog post for early stage companies that have failed. Given you can keep a mostly dead service with few customers running as is for such a small yearly cost.
The giveaway is usually a blog or social media accounts that haven't been updated in years.
Seems like a very low number IMO. Well over the majority of start-ups fail in the first 5 years. Perhaps when the largest batches make it to 5+ years the percentage will increase? Though at the rate they're adding new companies maybe it'll just continue to feed the monster.
Are you sure about that? I can unflag something I flag but I don't see any place where I can unvote. Unless it's karma gated? Though I would have figured I would have access to all the features by now...
For those who don't know, 1000memories was a service meant to allow people to create a "permanent" online memorial to loved ones who had died. Their CEO leaned hard on me to use them after I complained on my blog about the shabby business practices of a competitor, Legacy.com, when my best friend died.
Stay classy, YC. I'm sure it would have cost a fortune to keep the domain up.
This one might be tougher than usual since the functionality that's very visible is probably dead whereas the links on the bottom containing useful info are tiny and look like the background. You at least see the right site, though.
I don't know if it's YC's fault per se, but it sure doesn't reflect well on them when the first link on their giant cheerful "look at all our companies!" list is a dead domain serving malware.
YC Continuity now participates in every following round, up to something like a $350m valuation. So they follow on for everyone, to eliminate signaling.
Wow that's pretty sad. Knowing the low price of (effectively) indestructible cloud store (S3) and the near zero bandwidth cost of something like this (I mean seriously how much traffic do you really expect per site?), that's particularly sad.
I thought you had reached peak "SV-mocking Latin motto pun" with "Ad Astra Per Aspergera", but you always manage to outdo yourself. I feel like $11/year for a Pinboard account would be worth it to subsidize the puns alone. Bravo.
here's my problem and why I can't fit in either YC batch or YC Fellowship.
18 months ago, a small business owner asked me to solve a problem they have. They said they tried many existing solutions, and none helped. So, it turned out, it's the same problem I'm trying to solve for last 8 years, for my personal use; was put on the back burner, and did not think it has a big business potential. So, I've already spent so much time finding a solution in the past, and did not take me much time to find a solution to fit their needs.
fast forward till today, and I got alpha quality solution; working on it over the weekends. while working full time to pay mortgage and feed my family.
if I apply to YC, it means I have to quit my job, move to silicon valley (I live in SoCal) and moving away from my newborn baby, which is not practical, since we don't have family to help with the baby. and my wife on her own cannot take care of the baby, get groceries, do the house stuff.
if I apply to YC fellowship, there's not enough fund to justify quitting my full time job and focus on this company.
My only option seems to be to keep working on this product for next 6 months, putting 10-20 hrs over the weekend, and have slow progress.
I've talked to several businesses and they all agreed, they have the same problem, and they want solution right now, and willing to pay $200 to $2000 per month depending on features.
I wish there's a hybrid option, something like investment of 80K for 2-3% (similar to Fellowship, but more funds) and requirement to fly once a week to meet with YC partners and report on progress.
There have been YC companies in the past that spent most of their time away from San Francisco, including some companies that actually spent most of their time in Europe. AirBnB famously flew to and from New York every week. You don't have to be there for the entire 3 months, although I think all that travel will likely exhaust you if you aren't absolutely committed to your company (and it sounds like it could be difficult with the baby).
Also, $80k for 3% is a far better equity proposal than YC. $80k for 5% would be equivalent. That said, I can't imagine they'd splinter themselves any further. I think the way they've set themselves up works great for them, obviously they can't please everyone.
If you really have that much interest for your idea, get several LOI (letter of intent) notices from your potential customers and take it to investors. That should get you a lot more than $80k.
thank you for your suggestions, LOI can certainly help with raising money, I'll focus on making a better tested MVP and demo it to potential customers and get LOI.
Just a suggestion, but why not switch to a services model to get started? Sell them on the demo, present a plan to integrate it into their systems and the costs associated with that (integration being the key word). The costs associated are however long it will take you times $125-$250 per hour. That's enough to set yourself up as a going business at least, then figure out how to grow it from there. It will be a lot easier to raise money if you have 5 customers and example case studies that have worked through this process. You may find you don't need to. You don't need YC's stamp of approval to do this, and many others have followed a similar process in various verticals.
If you are a software developer, the risk of committing to one year (three months at least partially in Mountain View) doesn't sound that scary to me. If you leave on good terms with your current employer you could probably just get your job back if you failed at your startup.
It sounds like you have a great potential business. The size of the addressable market will determine whether or not you could have a startup [0] as defined by PG. Generally speaking, YC only wants to fund startups in their main program, which would be the one that would give you enough capital to actually make a run at it.
When we did YC (S13) we had three cofounders that all had families and single incomes. We made it work. We rented an apartment and lived/worked together for a few days during the week, and returned to our home offices the rest of the time. You could find a room to rent somewhere if you are a solo founder. Some used credit cards to float things. You'll have to get uncomfortable...
Part of doing a startup is about sacrificing bits of your life for your business. Investors (including YC) want to make sure you are all-in. I would be surprised if you would be able to raise any capital from experienced startup investors while working part-time on the project. They typically want you to have already dove into the deep end.
If you don't have a startup on your hands, but instead have a great small business, there's nothing to be ashamed of there and you can probably find some investment from local high net worth investors if you do some networking. You can test that with pre-orders or LOI's or something of that sort. However, those investments are probably going to be more "Shark Tank," full of onerous terms and potentially much more dilution for you as a founder.
> If you are a software developer, the risk of committing to one year (three months at least partially in Mountain View) doesn't sound that scary to me.
That assumes that they have enough savings to look after their family until they're making enough profit to take a reasonable salary.
Where in SoCal are you? I do that kind of investment, and also live in SoCal. You can email me at: erich@xygroup.co
I've also been in your exact situation a number of times; much of my past consulting work was because I'd already developed a solution for something for my own personal use.
That you have to be in the valley or get into YC to build a successful venture backed startup is just not true. I know it's hard to go against the grain and it's hard to bootstrap, but just focus on getting users and customers and traction and you can figure the other stuff out later. Don't let it paralyze you because it's just an insecure illusion (I know, I was there at one point and realized it was all in my head)
Also there are other accelerators if you really want to go to one (ex: Digital Ocean is out of TechStars).
I usually don't recommend it at pre-seed stage, but you could contract product development out and manage it from a technical level. Not cheap, but it would allow you create the first version faster. Either that or trim down your MVP feature set.
There also hundreds of other accelerators. Though I can't really recommend doing any accelerator while you have a 1-year-old. (But you also don't really need an accelerator to get your MVP done.)
I'm little confused here, I thought the most value from YC is meeting with partners. I would probably consider applying for next batch, and get their feedback on whether they fund without the need to move
This list is misleading because it only includes active companies, and doesn't include companies which have exited/died. (Contrast with http://yclist.com)
For example, filtering on s2006 only returns Scribd, but as YClist shows, there are 9 other startups in that batch.
Considering, what, 90% of start-ups fail in the first 5 years (80% in the first year)* I'm actually surprised a lot more are not dead. Though 5 years haven't passed for most of these so maybe there will be significantly more dead soon.
Ah didn't see that when I started writing. So this has neither successful exits that continue to operate nor unsuccessful ones that exited to the graveyard?
Great tool. Would be cool to see where these companies are now. Perhaps adding another columns and filter to get Status info: Acquired/Dead/IPO/Active.
And NimbleRx, which seemingly is still around, but not listed in any official or unofficial list. With the recent reviews these guys are getting, are they really around?
