That's an interesting thought. I would have never applied to YC if YC were always in Boston, so there must be someone out there who would never apply if it's always in California. Does that mean that, right now, a technically savvy angel out in Boston could start snatching up some of the MIT and Harvard alumni startups that YC ordinarily would have first dibs on? I dunno, but I guess if I were an investor in Boston, I'd be thinking about how to put myself in that position.

Alas, I don't think I will ever apply now. I had ideas of trying in 2-3 years, but I can't live in Palo Alto. I'll just figure it out on my own. :)

I don't know about never apply to California, but I think that the sudden lack of seed funders on the East Coast leaves a pretty severe gap. My cofounder and I are talking about this right now: California is pretty tough for him, and this coming in January means that there's less time to really discuss this. The fact that there's no seed funder over on this side means that it's going to be tough to figure out if things don't work - one-man start-ups just aren't a good idea.

Being in California would have changed everything for us.

For the better or worse? (I know I've seen you identify your startup in the past, but I don't recall it right now, so I don't know whether you're doing well or have gone back to the drawing board.)

TicketStumbler.com. We're doing well:

http://ticketstumbler.com/new-stuff/

But if we had spawned in CA we would have required funding. So far, we've been able to get by without it.

To soon to tell if for better or worse :).

i.e. the difference between becoming Ramen profitable and needing to push for funding?

Exactly.