|
I like this thread idea and I'd be happy to contribute what I can. For what it's worth, I'm a Y-combinator alumni (someone in here mentioned PG), and recently sold my company to Motorola Mobility. I'd be happy to talk about the experience or give my advice, whatever that may be worth. As for the guy lamenting that a big company came out with his idea right before he did, I can understand the fear of competing with the large companies, but if anything that's actually a GOOD thing for you. First off, right off the bat you have market validation - if a big company wants to do it, then it probably has value. This should strengthen the value of your idea when presented to VCs. Second, big companies are usually slowed by bureaucracy and have large clients they have to deal with and keep pleased. This gives you an advantage since you can listen more closely to your initial customers, and experiment with ideas a lot more quickly. Finally, there is almost always room in a market for multiple competitors. I'd have to hear the specific idea, but I'd be surprised if the fact that a large company is doing it first would completely ruin any chance of you competing.
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 04:35 |
|
|
Nybble posted:I would love to know how you got into Y-Combinator, as I may be pursuing some of the startup incubators. Sure thing, although I don't know exactly why we were picked so it's mostly speculation  I think the two main things that really helped for us were that my co-founder and I had already completed a large portion of our web app to demo, and that we had both quit our jobs to work on this full time. I believe it helped to show we were committed to completing what we started, and that we were actually capable of getting things done. PG always talks about how he looks more at the founders than the idea itself, so I would focus on selling yourself, your accomplishments, and your passion. Not to say the idea isn't important, but don't focus completely on that. Definitely talk about what differentiates your idea from the competition, and what makes you an expert on that. I saw an article recently by Sam Altman which highlights some of this (http://samaltman.com/how-to-get-into-y-combinator) and PG has written about his selection process in his essays somewhere I believe. If you have any specific questions about the process, I'll do my best to answer!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 23:39
|
|
|
whalesneedlove posted:Is there any chance of getting into an incubator without programming knowledge? I can't speak for all incubators, but for YC it's pretty drat difficult. There were a few companies that had a "business guy" but there weren't many, and they all had at least one superstar tech guy. Specifically I think Reddit was sort of like this, with Steve doing most of the coding work and Alexis working his rear end off promoting the company. You would almost certainly need someone to handle the coding side, and even then I think you are working at a disadvantage.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2011 04:42
|
|
|
slapsack posted:Anyone dealt with something like this before? If you haven't signed anything, there likely will be no ramifications of doing so. I'm curious how you plan to actually replace these companies though - presumably they already have some sort of user base? It's probably not going to be as easy as "build it and they will come".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2011 19:29
|
|
|
The Sweetling posted:Having read all these negative posts it prompts me to wonder: why is it that the people who actually build these companies and their products, particularly developers, almost always end up getting screwed out of just compensation while the executives clean up. I don't have a firm grasp of how the spoils of an IPO are distributed via stocks and shares so it's puzzling to me how venture capitalists and CEOs always come out ahead. Is it a lack of comprehension on the part of rank and file workers? I don't think this is quite accurate. The reason the VCs and founders are more likely to come out ahead is because they've put the majority of time and money into the company. Actually it's probably much more accurate to say that the VCs are more likely to come out ahead since they will always have preferred stock, while the founders typically have common stock. Preferred stock basically gives you first dibs to the money made during the M&A process, so until the VCs are paid back, no one else sees a cent. I think you do see some horror stories every once in a while, but from what I've seen in the valley it's not like people are getting ripped off left and right. When the founders make money, the common stock has value, and all of the vested common stock given to employees will be worth the same amount. Vesting schedules are also in place for a reason - should a guy working 4 years on a project with 10k vested shares get the same amount as a guy working for 1 year still working on vesting his 10k shares? It's put in place to reward people for sticking around for the long haul. To the guy who posted the story above, I think there are certain things the founders did which are inexcusable, including misleading you as to the future plans of the company, however it's difficult to say whether it was meant to be malicious, or something the company was forced into. The thing is, these deals are always "in the works" and most of them end up going nowhere. Just because the founders were in talks to sell doesn't mean they weren't still thinking of the long term. It's just one option out of many that come up in a companies life. Now as to why they sold it could be a multitude of things. Maybe the company offered them a value they just couldn't turn down. Maybe the VCs were getting nervous and forced a sale. Maybe the company was doing a lot more poorly than you think and everyone was getting desperate. A lot of this stuff happens behind the scenes and founders don't always communicate it. Whether or not that is the right thing I'm not sure, but it's very common. As far as your compensation, a 6 month cliff on vested stock is pretty common. You were probably working very hard for those 6 months, but I'm willing to bet the founders have been working at least that hard for many years just to get things going, often without pay. Anyway, it seems like you ended up with the lovely end of the stick this time, and you have my sympathies for that, but don't let it sour you from startups. My advice would be to try to get in earlier if you want to take risks for a bigger payday, otherwise you are mostly working for a nice bonus if things work out nicely. I would say anyone past the 10th employee or so shouldn't really count on stock options making them rich, and should be negotiating competitive pay. Disclaimer: I could be full of poo poo about any of this.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2011 19:23
|
|