Yes all day every day I do things for YC companies I'm not close to, but our biggest exit ever for sure gets extra attention. In any case, I think you'd be surprised to see my calendar. We paradoxically spend the most of our time on the least successful companies, and trust that doing so will help us get to fund the next Airbnb.
I do try to always disclose conflicts. And it's definitely true that areas like nuclear energy that I'm personally passionate about and believe I can contribute to will get extra attention from me.
The obvious parallel one could draw here is Ron Conway -- these folks help startups because they can, not because they're profiteering. The suggestion is almost offensive given what Sam has done here, which I don't think most people would have had the guts to do. I doubt any legal counsel would have suggested he post this, anyway.
Few folks put in more time, energy, and effort than Sam does to help startup founders, and I think that's partially how he's built up such a world-class reputation.
Sam is making a bold move here with this blog post, given the case. We should be celebrating him doing the right thing here. A lot of folks wouldn't want to publicly touch a topic like this given the legal case.
Any startup would be lucky to have his help, and he's probably the most gracious and helpful person in the startup ecosystem you'll be lucky enough to meet. The fact he's been an investor in the past is, I suspect, more a byproduct of the fact he meets with so many startups as he does. If you spent all day meeting with hedge fund managers, for instance, you'd likely end up being an LP or advisor for at least a couple of them. That doesn't affect the quality of your hedge fund decisions or advice.
Sam has helped me when he had no vested interest in doing so, and I'll always be grateful for that.
This is obviously emotional, professional and personal for you and I think that limited your objectivity. It isn't that this needed to be objective, but that your role is as an enabler. In my opinion this should have been written by the founder, and your post should be a comment or set of pull qoutes attached to the article or referenced by Cruise.
It is a worthy cause (or seems so) but at least sharing the post or contributing to a founders post allows the perception & impetus to be on the company, with your direct support.
That said, the message and what you've conveyed seems correct, just not up to your usual standards.
Nevertheless, we commonly get email responses from YC partners (including Sam) inside of five minutes, and I've met and gotten helpful advice when we needed help from six partners (including Sam) in just the past year or so.
YC doesn't only help the huge successes: They also do a tremendous amount to help tiny companies, and even if they're still tiny many years after YC.
Regardless your anecdote does parallel other YC companies' in that a Brian Chesky email is tantamount to a first year YC founder's or as you mentioned a founder from batches over half a decade old.
He's a young guy and whilst I am sure very clever, probably has wisdom to gain.
One of the hardest things to learn is "how to do nothing".
I'm guessing the lesson for him coming out of this will be to not risk his reputation for wise leadership trying to intervene in someone else's battle. If you suspect something is going to get legal then it really makes sense to sit on your hands even though it is tempting to speak out.
Rallying support for a participant in a fight..... well it just doesn't look good.
It would be easy to read this post and think "Rich young influential Silicon Valley powerbroker wielding his power to force someone to give up their claim, so that he may cash in on a deal." I'm guessing that's not the way Sam wants to be seen.
First, you are right - every YC partner has very limited time, and if you expect to get a lot of it for anything and everything you will be disappointed. YC wouldn't scale that way, and it would be a waste of the partners' time.
That said, if you ever NEED a partners time, they will bend over backwards to make it happen, regardless of whether you just sold for $1b, were personal friends with them, or whatever else.
YC has drastically increased the number of partners to meet the demand of a growing batch size. I've seen partners do more publicly for new garage startups (new YC companies) being strongarmed by large companies. Totally no surprises here.
TS seems generously like the best B-list incubator. I've never understand the pull, given that they have none of the status and thought leadership demonstrated so regularly by YC.
Really now, would it make any sense (whatsoever) Sam or anyone at YC (or anyone in the world!) to give equal time to every person/company/thing/other?? No, of course not. That would be ludicrous.
And this isn't any ole company that Sam or YC has an interest in. It's multiple time YC participant that has built something awesome and achieved one milestone on its journey as YC's largest exit to date (hopefully).
For one thing, Sam would emphatically not be doing his job as a VC if he didn't make himself fully and readily available to the most successful YC companies. He would be doing a huge disservice to YC's LPs if he didn't provide any assistance possible in preserving literally millions of dollars for them.
If the question itself is distasteful, well, that's surprising to me and I clearly still have much to learn. Enlighten me?
You know, the most damning things are usually veiled accusations -- the sort of thing where it puts the accused in a position of looking like an overly defensive lunatic reading in something not there if they try to defend themselves while thoroughly dragging their name through the mud.
If it really doesn't matter to you, leave it be. Your curiosity does not have to be satisfied. Since he has stakes in this and this is apparently idle curiosity on your part, it just looks bad.
(I don't really care. I have zero skin in this game. I am just hoping that answers your question. I am weird like that about certain things. Shrug.)
Or similarly, you note in this post that you spent a whole day dealing with this issue. Hanging around HN we frequently read about how YC partners' time is in high demand, many applications to YC are viewed for literally only seconds, office hours are in fact not hours, etc. Would any YC company get such a chunk of your time?
I certainly don't mean to be some jerk on the internet telling you how you may or may not spend your hours. That's a) not my place and b) a topic I'm not qualified to philosophize on.
Nonetheless, it's more than a bit disconcerting to read a blog post which starts out with "here are some of my various connections to an interests in this company" followed by "and I'm doing them special favors, apparently at risk to myself, including writing this blog post."
This blog post gave me quite a sense of "well, sama and YC have a solid moral compass and plenty of self confidence but don't always follow the rules." The "I'm making an exception of my usual don't-be-on-YC-company-boards policy to be chairman of two YC companies" post from a year ago [1] had a similar vibe. Both posts made me wary of YC.
[1] http://blog.samaltman.com/energy Maybe I should clarify that I'm rooting for Helion and UPower and hope they go far with Sam. But a policy of I won't be on YC boards unless it's for my favorite company in one of my favorite application areas sounds a lot like I've given up desserts and other refined sugars (except warm brownie sundaes with ice cream and chocolate sauce).