Unfortunately Apple have adopted a philosophy of rejecting any app that loosely competes with iOS native apps - we for example had an app rejected for allowing users to share apps on Facebook/Twitter... the reason given was apparently it didn't provide any additional functionality over the native app (even though it did!)
I took the guidelines to say the important thing about the idea submission is that it provides evidence the founders are smart. Wouldn't smart founders still want to take advantage of every opportunity to provide such evidence?
Given that some people think YC is starting to see scaling problems, I wonder if they will continue the trend of growing each class size or try to keep it around the same (or maybe even try to scale it down?).
It was very useful for me when faux-applying to have the dark glow of vim instead of the YC page's harsh white, and I thought I might put it out there for others to use.
The previous time we applied, we pasted the text version on a google doc and created two versions (main and redacted versions), which we were then shared with the team and our app-reviewers (for the app-reviewers, disable editing and allow only for comments). We found this strategy to be really helpful in gathering feedback and more importantly it helped speed up filling up the app.
I have a whole writing workflow built around using vim and git for testing out new story ideas or structure, and this format works best for in terms of rebasing/merging at the very end. It's really about getting all the distractions out of the way and taking a long, hard look at your business - whatever gets you to that point is awesome :)
For such things I invariably use WriteRoom. I find formatting and futzing with a web app to be built in procrastination mechanisms. It's generally trivial to spend a few minutes copying and pasting once the actual text is done.
WriteRoom is nice—it's also one of the first distraction-free writing app—but i prefer to use Byword. I like to combine paragraph focus with full screen for distraction free mode. Also it support markdown syntax, that for me is a must have for a writing app.
There is a whole spectrum of vision impairments (pun intended) involving
excessive sensitivity to bright light. As you might expect, there is no
single answer to all of them. A lot of people have trouble with white
background and dark text normally seen in applications and on the web.
The best answer is knowing how to configure your software. There's
actually a reason for the ancient phrase "User Agent" which predates the
web by decades; your software should be an agent for you and handle the
details for you much like a Hollywood agent takes care of the details
for a star.
You can configure some web browsers to take care of the pesky details
for you like fixing dark text on white background:
For me, with my config, every website looks basically like that. The
web would be nearly unusable for me otherwise.
I can hear the "artistic designer" faction gathering their torches and
pitchforks due to me offending their skilled sensibilities with
something so ugly, but when you have a disability, often your only
choice is between something less cool and nothing at all.
This (and not div shadows) is exactly why CSS was invented. If you're looking for a web browser that lets you quickly change the look for individual web pages, try Opera.
As some might know the H1 for this year has been used up (unlike in the past 4-5 years), will YC still be ok accepting ideas/startups that cannot be on h1?
Some clarity on this front will be very helpful for immigrants :)
Unless I'm mistaken, H1B is not the visa that YC founders would use anyway. Even if you have an H1B visa, you would still have to re-apply for the appropriate visa.
I am not very sure there is another visa that might work well, unless the founders are from Canada/Australia (maybe even Europe not sure). Rest of the founders might still have to be on H1 if my research is right.
This is interesting for me also. I'm an Italian citizen and I would like to apply and relocate to the Bay Area. But I need to figure out the entire visa thing, and how to make it work for starting company.
Please look into the B category first (both b1 & B2), for the 3 months period. After YC, if you get funding, as a founder you should look at the E visa category. I believe E2 visa is the one for founders with secured funding that can realistically create 10 american jobs in the long run.
We are still waiting to hear back from AngelPad after 2 months. I personally prefer the smaller size of AngelPad to YC. But I'm hopeful we'll hear back and get into AngelPad before application date of YC, if not we'll be applying to YC to hedge our bets.
They are both excellent programs. I definitely wouldn't be disappointed if I got accepted in YC or AngelPad. If you get a confirmed yes from AngelPad, ONLY then re-evaluate your choice. Remember that YC graduates have a convertible note from StartFund as well.
To your point, we'll plan on applying to YC. But just so you know, AngelPad also gives about $100k of additional fund from other investors on top of the $6k/n.
However, the size of angelpad 10-12 makes me feel you get a lot more attention and focus than a class of 70-80.
I just want to ask whether a prototype and customers willing to use the product will be valuable for YC? The problem is we are an unproven team and because YC focuses more on the teams rather than ideas, should we wait for the YC S13 applications? Your take on that?
A prototype and customers willing to use the product are forms of traction that YC looks for. There is no harm in applying now and then applying again later if you get rejected, other than your time.
PG: What would your advice be to someone with no co-founder? Apply anyway and see what you think, or don't even bother and wait until you've found someone to work with?
I appreciate the issues with single founder companies however am finding it hard to locate someone with the required interest and skill in my area.
As someone who applied as a single founder (and got in), just apply anyway. However, ensure that you get across that you are indeed open to finding a co-founder.
Get a cofounder. If your startup succeeds, you could spend 5 years or more working on it. It's rounding error to spend 6 months making a concerted effort to find a cofounder first. And while it can be hard to find a cofounder, it's not as hard as starting a successful startup.
Thanks for the reply. Based on your response and the responses of others, I think that I will in all likelihood apply with the intention of searching for someone to work with (perhaps local to SF) if my application progresses. If it does not, it will allow me to focus my search on my local area. Thanks again :-)
For me has been extremely hard to find a cofounder. Hey there people from Dallas TX, do you want to create something awesome and needs a developer!? Please contact me.
Do you make a distinction between "solo founder who is and intends to remain solo" and "solo founder who just hasn't happened to meet the right co-founder(s) yet?"
Just curious, as I see those as being pretty distinct cases. With Fogbeam Labs, I was a "solo founder" for a year or so, before our second founder came onboard, and then it was about 8 months after that when our 3 founder joined up. I imagine other people find themselves in that place where they are open to (even seeking) a co-founder, but just haven't met the right person yet.
In any case, my thought, FWIW, is that a founder should keep working on advancing their vision, whether or not they have located (a) co-founder(s) yet. I wouldn't "stop the world" to do nothing but look for a co-founder.
The unfortunate fact is that there is not much difference between the two cases. Most people who are looking for a cofounder when they start YC are still looking for one 6 months later. Alarmingly often that's because they recruited one in the interim who's already gone.
Co-founder dynamics are extremely important and extremely fragile.
You are choosing someone to go on long term journey, where you will no longer only be building something cool, but you'll be building a company, be responsible for hiring and, God forbid, firing people. You will be responsible for your employee's lives, and their families, you will be responsible for your investors time and effort to make all your promises come true.
All of this becomes extremely harder after you've been traveling alone for a long time (which can often be a few months, as startups are that intense). Sharing all this responsibilities with someone who has not been there from day one is challenging for both parties: can you trust them to be with you in the long run, do you agree in fundamental things, how do you deal with different company stakes and vesting periods? And, if you ever pivot (as many successful startups have[1]), how will all of these pressures come to live?
And it gets worse after you get investment (in the form of YC money, angel money, and progressively more) as your choice of co-founder will likely reflect on you, from your investor's idea. And it always add risk to the table, no matter how you put it.
All of this while still working and growing your startup.
Don't take this lightly. It may be harder to find a proper co-founder under these circumstances than founding a successful startup. But being able to have people you trust beside you building a company can be an invaluable thing.
A founder is someone who founds the company along with you, it seems you are saying people should just find a random person and call them a co-founder? Why can't there just be one founder?
Drew Houston originally applied as a single founder (and then lined up a talented and committed co-founder) and turned into one of YC's two biggest successes so far, so take heart.
I'm pretty sure we'd have funded him anyway. Trevor had tried his prototype and said it was good. The big advantage of Arash (and of good cofounders in general) was not that he got Dropbox through YC interviews but that he helped make the company successful.
Even if you manage to get in without a co-founder, you'll probably still want a co-founder. I've talked to several YC alums without a co-founder looking to hire an employee who can serve as a co-founder.
I absolutely do however I want to find someone as enthusiastic as I am, not somebody who is just coming along for the ride because I convinced them it's a great idea. Where I am currently (location-wise), finding the former will be harder than the latter, I suspect, and if possible I would rather work with someone locally rather than remotely.
I'm from Liverpool, UK. I turned down a place at university to become a programmer as I was sick of formal education, preferring instead to teach myself. It's a choice I regret in some ways but the past few years since leaving college have been fun, working as a programmer.
There's a growing startup scene in the UK. You may have to travel as far as Edinburgh or London, but go to enough events and you should run into plenty of people with the same kinds of passions. Add to that looking in places where people share your subject passion, and I'm sure you'll find someone. It's all about hustling.
There certainly is and I have become move involved with it, especially in recent months. Still finding it tricky to locate someone however and most people I have met have been quite considerably older than me. You're right though - it may be time to start looking outside of my local area, however it would be nice to find someone who I could meet regularly to hack at ideas with.
Getting a startup off the ground is not a one man job. Sooner you get another pair of hands and a brain to help you out with this task the better. Why wait until accepted or not accepted? It's irrelevant, you just need at least one more person besides yourself
Getting a startup off the ground is not a one man job. Sooner you get another pair of hands and a brain to help you out with this task the better. Why wait until accepted or not accepted? It's irrelevant, you just need at least one more person besides yourself
PG, if my co-founder and I are currently bootstrapping a company and starting to work with a law firm to go through all the formalities of incorporation, would you recommend holding off on that for a few months in case we are accepted into YC? It's not cheap (by far) to pay for that stuff out of pocket, and I imagine YC has a lot more experience guiding young companies through the formation process, so curious about your opinion. Thanks.
in my experience, regardless of your application to YC it is a good idea to get things documented. not because you mistrust your cofounder, or anything of that sort. simply it puts everyones mind at ease for what they get out of it. not having documentation lingers in the back of your mind.
Totally agree about getting everyone on the same page and putting things on paper. The main reason I asked, however, is cost. Some lawyers have squishy/unpredictable pricing when it comes to formation and advice, while the fixed "good" ones are not cheap (e.g. ~$5K). Others try to wave their hands around pricing and just use a "pay it later" approach, but we'd rather keep things simple. I was just wondering if it's safer to get YC help/guidance to make sure we don't get burned, in case we get in since the timing between now and the deadline is almost a rounding error.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2246544: > Don't incorporate, though, if you can avoid it. It's easier to start with our paperwork than to transfer an existing LLC or S-Corp to a C-Corp.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1778985: > It's not a deal-breaker unless it's botched. The right way to do it would be to use a convertible note written so that YC funding wouldn't trigger conversion. If you have a lawyer who can arrange that. But you'd have to incorporate, and you (and we) would then be stuck with however you did, so we'd hope you did it right.
According to those and other previous comments from him, they prefer it if you leave the incorporation process up to YC, since they specialize in setting up startups, but if you've already incorporated (or even taken funding), it's not a deal-breaker -- unless it's been done in a way that's incompatible with YC investment.
you can also incorporate before applying (if you're serious about the idea). Use services like LegalZoom, they cost around $300-$600.
In the event that you do get into YC, or raise 5-6 figures of seed money, you can always go to a lawyer and reissue stock certs, articles of incorporation, etc.
They've accepted several music-related startups in the last batch or two. Maybe the bar is higher, but they still accept them regardless of the hesitation. There is a difference between a music startup that needs millions in upfront record label deals and one that relies on getting music in other ways (e.g. artists upload their own music with consent).
I'm a rails hacker and user acquisition/web analytics expert looking for a cofounder in the bay area to apply to the next round of YC. If anyone is interested in chatting, please email me (email address in my profile). Thanks!
I've been interested in applying to YC for quite a while, but recently I graduated and moved to the south bay (near Mountain View) for work. It really stood out to me this time that $11,000 + $3,000n is not a lot of money. With 3 founders that's $20,000. 3 founders working in the tech industry can make $20,000 PER MONTH on typical salaries. It seems like it would be more appealing to people without good paying work, or who are interested more for the connections (which maybe applies to me, I'm thinking about it). Assuming all 3 founders cohabit (which I think is standard), this is a reasonable amount of money to live on, but it would be fairly bare bones if my quick mental math is right.
It's not about the money, it's enough to survive. The founders of Reddit after selling their company for tens of millions went through YC again for Hipmunk. It's not about the money, its about the people.
Exactly. That's the main reason I want to get accepted into YC. The contacts and people you meet are going to be way more valuable to you and your startup than the money itself. If you had a good paying job, you could probably save up and fund the $11k yourself.
YC is just a good way to fast track your startup and get it moving right from the beginning.
I've always looked at the yc program not as a means to get funds but rather as a sort of exclusive community where you get very good advice for your startup. if money is crucial for starting your business then you might indeed be better of with more traditional VCs.
(2) As founders, you should NOT be paying yourselves real salary until you raise significant money. Even then, you should be paying yourselves on the order of $50-60K/year, modulo a few edge cases if you have a family, mortgage, etc.
As a startup founder, you should NOT be paying yourself anywhere near $20k/month - that's why you have equity. If the company does well, you'll make a lot when you get bought or IPO.
"It seems like it would be more appealing to people without good paying work"
Good paying work is golden handcuffs.
Many of the people who started on the net (90's) were able to do so because they had nothing else significant going on at the time. If they had a high paid corporate job, or even a "normal" paying job, were an attorney, or even ran a small business, they had neither the time nor did it make sense to take chances.
If you have nothing, as Dylan said, you have nothing to lose.
One thing I noticed while in YC was that the most successful people I met (founders, investors, etc) weren't primarily motivated by the financial rewards. Money is a result of a successful venture, not the main objective.
Point is, founding a startup doesn't actually make sense from a financial perspective. Most often you will be more profitable having been employed.
"If you want to apply, please submit your application online by 8 pm PT on October 30, 2012. Groups that submit early have a significant advantage because we have more time to read their applications."
155 comments
[ 18.7 ms ] story [ 754 ms ] threadin your eyes, what exactly have they announced that would cause someone to pivot?
Also, missing stuff: there's no NFC, so NFC payments are pushed out for another year in favor of scan-screen.
iPod Nano pedometer kind of kills fitbit somewhat (or a new fitbit like product, including sleep monitors like wakemate).
Arguably the sapphire crystal vs. glass lens for camera makes the market tougher for iPhone/iPod Touch cases.
New iTunes + iTunes Match/iCloud features should hurt Pandora/Spotify type companies.
* Interviews will be around November 25th [EDIT: November 27th-Dec 1]
* First dinner will be around November 30th [EDIT: Early January]
* Demo day will be approximately March 25th
It was very useful for me when faux-applying to have the dark glow of vim instead of the YC page's harsh white, and I thought I might put it out there for others to use.
http://www.hogbaysoftware.com/products/writeroom
http://bywordapp.com
The best answer is knowing how to configure your software. There's actually a reason for the ancient phrase "User Agent" which predates the web by decades; your software should be an agent for you and handle the details for you much like a Hollywood agent takes care of the details for a star.
You can configure some web browsers to take care of the pesky details for you like fixing dark text on white background:
http://www.designtools.org/pix/news.ycombinator.com_w2013for...
For me, with my config, every website looks basically like that. The web would be nearly unusable for me otherwise.
I can hear the "artistic designer" faction gathering their torches and pitchforks due to me offending their skilled sensibilities with something so ugly, but when you have a disability, often your only choice is between something less cool and nothing at all.
YC has a great community to discuss this kind of question: do not let your immigration status prevent you from applying.
As some might know the H1 for this year has been used up (unlike in the past 4-5 years), will YC still be ok accepting ideas/startups that cannot be on h1?
Some clarity on this front will be very helpful for immigrants :)
I am not very sure there is another visa that might work well, unless the founders are from Canada/Australia (maybe even Europe not sure). Rest of the founders might still have to be on H1 if my research is right.
However, the size of angelpad 10-12 makes me feel you get a lot more attention and focus than a class of 70-80.
BTW, are you a YC applicant or graduate yourself?
If not, care to flesh out a few more?
I appreciate the issues with single founder companies however am finding it hard to locate someone with the required interest and skill in my area.
Do you make a distinction between "solo founder who is and intends to remain solo" and "solo founder who just hasn't happened to meet the right co-founder(s) yet?"
Just curious, as I see those as being pretty distinct cases. With Fogbeam Labs, I was a "solo founder" for a year or so, before our second founder came onboard, and then it was about 8 months after that when our 3 founder joined up. I imagine other people find themselves in that place where they are open to (even seeking) a co-founder, but just haven't met the right person yet.
In any case, my thought, FWIW, is that a founder should keep working on advancing their vision, whether or not they have located (a) co-founder(s) yet. I wouldn't "stop the world" to do nothing but look for a co-founder.
You are choosing someone to go on long term journey, where you will no longer only be building something cool, but you'll be building a company, be responsible for hiring and, God forbid, firing people. You will be responsible for your employee's lives, and their families, you will be responsible for your investors time and effort to make all your promises come true.
All of this becomes extremely harder after you've been traveling alone for a long time (which can often be a few months, as startups are that intense). Sharing all this responsibilities with someone who has not been there from day one is challenging for both parties: can you trust them to be with you in the long run, do you agree in fundamental things, how do you deal with different company stakes and vesting periods? And, if you ever pivot (as many successful startups have[1]), how will all of these pressures come to live?
And it gets worse after you get investment (in the form of YC money, angel money, and progressively more) as your choice of co-founder will likely reflect on you, from your investor's idea. And it always add risk to the table, no matter how you put it.
All of this while still working and growing your startup.
Don't take this lightly. It may be harder to find a proper co-founder under these circumstances than founding a successful startup. But being able to have people you trust beside you building a company can be an invaluable thing.
[1] http://www.fastcompany.com/1836238/how-eric-ries-coined-pivo...
just my 2 cents.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1778985: > It's not a deal-breaker unless it's botched. The right way to do it would be to use a convertible note written so that YC funding wouldn't trigger conversion. If you have a lawyer who can arrange that. But you'd have to incorporate, and you (and we) would then be stuck with however you did, so we'd hope you did it right.
According to those and other previous comments from him, they prefer it if you leave the incorporation process up to YC, since they specialize in setting up startups, but if you've already incorporated (or even taken funding), it's not a deal-breaker -- unless it's been done in a way that's incompatible with YC investment.
In the event that you do get into YC, or raise 5-6 figures of seed money, you can always go to a lawyer and reissue stock certs, articles of incorporation, etc.
(2) As founders, you should NOT be paying yourselves real salary until you raise significant money. Even then, you should be paying yourselves on the order of $50-60K/year, modulo a few edge cases if you have a family, mortgage, etc.
burn rate = (runway)^(-1)
Reining in your burn rate as much as feasible is one of the easiest ways to extend your runway, and your chance of getting to awesomeness.
A typical job is a better way to maximize one's disposable income reliably next month or next year.
Good paying work is golden handcuffs.
Many of the people who started on the net (90's) were able to do so because they had nothing else significant going on at the time. If they had a high paid corporate job, or even a "normal" paying job, were an attorney, or even ran a small business, they had neither the time nor did it make sense to take chances.
If you have nothing, as Dylan said, you have nothing to lose.
Point is, founding a startup doesn't actually make sense from a financial perspective. Most often you will be more profitable having been employed.
"If you want to apply, please submit your application online by 8 pm PT on October 30, 2012. Groups that submit early have a significant advantage because we have more time to read their applications."