8 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 28.8 ms ] thread
I think you should only call a program an accelerator if they invest at the start in all participants. Otherwise a word like incubator or competition probably makes more sense.
A bit of Occam's Razor might be called for before suggesting hidden agendas and IP theft by foreign governments.

It sounds like a new program that overpromised, didn't plan well, and struggled to deliver would have been a similar experience.

Perhaps Hanlon's razor too: never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence.
I like this a lot - always give others the benefit of the doubt!
That was my first thought as well. I see nothing overtly "unethical" here... what I see is classic poor planning and management.
I read this earlier today, and I don't remember the author calling out the accelerator by name. Was this a later edit?
There's no barrier-to-entry for a shop to call themselves an "accelerator."

Reputation*3.

YC, 500 and some others. Doing due-diligence, building rapport with key people and managing expectations can help. Also, big names have a lot more to lose (rep) and so tend to be safer bets.