I wish I could say it means a lot if you don't make it to the interview stage, because that would imply we're really good judges. But unfortunately we know we miss a lot of good applications. We have thousands of applications to read, and not much time to do it in. It's difficult for us to distinguish between applications that are genuinely weak, and those where the founders just don't present themselves very well.

Do you have a system that would allow you to detect and prevent patterns analogous to "justice is what the judge ate for breakfast" (more formally known as "legal realism")?

See for example:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/1...

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/17/6889

Couldn't the point be made that those founders who don't present themselves well, might have a bit more trouble presenting their startup to customers? i.e. They can't sell themselves well, so it could be argued that they might have trouble selling the benefits of their startup to customers?

Thoughts?

Good point, but there are still two ways YC could miss good applicants: (1) they present themselves better in some other medium that customers care about, or (2) they don't know how to sell yet, but have an aptitude for learning to sell.

That said, I don't know how the YC application process could be changed to catch either of those situations.

Yes, those two things are correlated, although they are not the same. I imagine based on what pg said that there are startups that are great in every respect except how they present themselves to YC.

I'm also applying with two friends. Even if we don't get in, we've already been changed due to the application.

Filling out the app made the idea more real for all of us, and in the process we discovered that our fourth founder really wasn't passionate about the idea, and isn't ready to leave his day job. Had we not gone through the application process, we probably would have lost a lot of steam in trying to work with a founder that wasn't fully committed.

Also, we've been in a mad rush to get a MVP up and running. The idea is about three weeks old at this point, and the MVP will be up in the next few days. Had we not been motivated by the looming deadline (and wanting to get the app in early) we might have just thought about the idea for months, instead of actually implementing it.

Finally, the idea we're applying with is kind of my baby. I went out and found my co-founders by pitching the idea to everyone I could find, taking feedback, refining, and pitching more. I'm a back-end guy, and I needed front-end co-founders. Now I have a UI ninja and an amazing designer working with me to build a product we all believe in. If it weren't for the application, I would have just fiddled around with the backend code on my own, which doesn't exactly create an engaging user experience.

It almost doesn't matter if we get accepted at this point (not to say that I wouldn't be elated), because we're in such a better spot than we were a month ago.

The application for me forced me to grasp a clear picture of my vision from the fuzzy direction that my prototype has been heading in.The intro video process really helped me arrive at a concrete and concise pitch that doesn't rely on me demo-ing the app on a screen, which is what I usually do.

One thing you should do is update your HN profile to include links and other info. I'm sure I'm not the only one who reads HN who is looking to fund people regardless of yc application. I did check out alexhaefner.com but not much is there. If you have something to say make it easy to find. Also if your domain is alexhaefner.com get rid of bluehost as the registrant and put it in your name.

I agree with you completely, I've made some changes already. The site that I want to show people is about a week away from being where I would advertise it though. It will be on my profile soon.

Thanks for the advice!

If you don't get in I'd say you should launch anyway. Listen to your customers, hustle, and you'll succeed regardless of YC.

I'd also highly suggest moving to the bay area. Meeting the right people and getting your name out there is just SO much easier (we just did this and it's night and day, regardless of Austin being a good startup town as well).

We're in the same boat, we just applied for Winter 2011 with what we think is a great team, solid idea, and some early traction. If we don't get in we'll still be focusing on launching, traction, and listening to our customers early on.

Hey cwilson, can you elaborate on why you think "meeting the right people and getting your name out there is just SO much easier" in the Bay Area? Do you mean getting your name out to customers, investors, potential hires, potential acquirers, or some combination?

I'm not cwilson, but... all of those. The Bay Area has more hype for new startups, more investors, more software engineers, more acquiring companies, and more early adopters who will try your new site (and quite possibly pay for same).

we are in the same boat as you in our w2012 application. we applied early enough since we had most of the pieces together. i agree that the wait time plays tricks with your head. checking hacker news, email, and our phones multiple times a day doesn't really ease the anxiety. but exciting none the less.

we want this as much as the next guy, if not more, but we also know getting in is not the end result, it's only the beginning. it's gonna get much tougher once you're in!

the advice i got a few week ago really helped: "don't put all your eggs in one basket" The more NOs you hear the closer you'll get to YES (unless...)

Cisco systems, pitched 70+ VCs/investors before it got funding, similar stories for intel, ebay, amazon, google, twitter, and so on...