capocannoniere

> Frankly, I'm kinda surprised if an obvious optimization like that isn't already in place - let those who care about the shape pay more for the pretty ones, and let those who don't save by buying the rest.

Oh but that's exactly how it already works in existing supply chains: "imperfect" produce gets allocated quite well with food manufacturers, restaurants and food halls, or gets donated to foster homes, hospitals, etc. And many supermarkets do in fact stock up with "imperfect" produce.

"Reducing food waste" makes for good marketing. Except it's not that true.

In your parent comment you mention:

> not much of the strategy content applies to hardware companies

While it's probably a good idea to not blindly follow every single piece of advice (by YC or anyone), saying that not much of the content applies is probably a bit of a stretch. Considering how many successful companies YC has funded in the hard-tech space, I'd be receptive to at least some of their advice / insights.

You also mention:

> you have this de-facto "ship and iterate" model from the SaaS world which just doesn't apply to nontrivial hardware projects.

Again, it may be a good idea to question the advice of "ship and iterate", but saying _it just doesn't apply to nontrivial hardware project_ is again a bit of a stretch. As the above commenter mentions, the success of Cruise is a good counterexample.

While Airbnb is clearly going through a rough patch right now, there is a clear bull-case argument for why Airbnb will emerge stronger than it's ever been after this:

- Airbnb has sufficient cash in the bank to survive the crisis.

- A significant % of hotels and budget chains will not survive the crisis --> decreased competitor supply

- People will be looking for budget options when traveling --> increased demand for Airbnb

- People will seek to make extra income to make ends meet --> increased supply for Airbnb

Replit sounds awesome, especially once you put it this way ("view-> source for code, plus a server"). Kudos to the team.

PG tweet for context: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1256526589300441093

> I wrote this yesterday as an example for my kids.

> A lot of people learned how to make web pages using view->source. Replit is view->source for code, plus a server you can run a copy on. A generation of kids will learn to program from it.

This is exceptionally well-written. And it looks like YC's design has stepped up quite a notch too :)

Quick question: how to reconcile these two almost-conflicting views:

1) Raising money is the CEO’s job. If you are the CEO, you should plan for it to be your sole, full-time focus.[...] Do what you can to avoid distracting others with fundraising. Co-founders or other executives are typically only brought in to answer specific questions (e.g. CTOs handle technical diligence), and usually only at the full partnership stage.

Even in the rare case of co-CEOs, it’s best to have a single point of contact. Investors want to see a clear decision-making process, which generally requires a final decision-maker. (https://www.ycombinator.com/resources/prepare-your-company)

2) Signing on with a Series A lead is the beginning of a 10 year relationship. If all goes well, that’s how long your board member will have a say in your company. As such, optimize for your board member, not vanity metrics, like valuation. (https://www.ycombinator.com/resources/how-to-choose-an-inves...)

Given point 2), shouldn't non-CEO founders also be involved in at least some meetings with investors to weigh in on who they want to have as board members?

While I personally find Asana clunky and slow (I've used many tools for project management: Notion and Jira are by far what I personally enjoy the most, followed by Airtable at a distant 3rd), Sam Altman's perspective on Asana are interesting to look at for a more positive outlook on the company: https://blog.samaltman.com/asana

I'd argue the outcome of this will be that Facebook will launch their own payments infrastructure on top of WhatsApp. There was no need for crypto or a Libra association to begin with.

According to the leaked Facebook all-hands audio, Facebook is already planning to launch payments in Mexico by end of 2019 (https://qz.com/1719731/zuckerberg-confirms-facebook-payment-...).

I wouldn't be surprised if this goes extremely well for Facebook and WhatsApp payments becomes WeChat Pay / AliPay for the rest of the world.

While I don't know about Zenefits in particular, keep in mind that YC companies can opt out of this list:

> One thing to note is that this is not an exhaustive list of the top YC companies. We allowed alumni to opt out of being listed for any reason.

Erik Torenberg's Village Global [1] was started fairly recently and is already extremely highly regarded in the start-up community. Much more so than Techstars or any other non-YC accelerator in my impression.

[1] https://www.villageglobal.vc/ https://www.villageglobal.vc/network-catalyst/

Paul Graham wrote an essay on this topic, aimed towards high-school students. His advice: stay upwind http://www.paulgraham.com/hs.html

> Instead of working back from a goal, work forward from promising situations. This is what most successful people actually do anyway.

> Suppose you're a college freshman deciding whether to major in math or economics. Well, math will give you more options: you can go into almost any field from math. If you major in math it will be easy to get into grad school in economics, but if you major in economics it will be hard to get into grad school in math.

> Flying a glider is a good metaphor here. Because a glider doesn't have an engine, you can't fly into the wind without losing a lot of altitude. If you let yourself get far downwind of good places to land, your options narrow uncomfortably. As a rule you want to stay upwind. So I propose that as a replacement for "don't give up on your dreams." Stay upwind.

Tagger News might be what you're looking for: https://www.taggernews.com/

It was a TC Disrupt hackathon project that generates tags using AI, and seems to still be functional.

Here's another fun one:

The _average_ Y Combinator company is worth ~100M [1]

The _median_ Y Combinator company, however, is worth closer to $0 (the majority of YC companies don't get to a Series A).

This just highlights how counter-intuitive power-law distributions are.

[1] Calculation:

Discard pre YC'17 companies for the purposes of this calculation, as these are still too early stage for meaningful analysis. Brex, Faire and Atrium are the only YC '17 or later on this list.

Numerator: The top 100 companies have a combined valuation of ~$110B, according to this list.

Denominator: There were 1,400 YC companies as of Summer '17 according to https://blog.ycombinator.com/yc-summer-2017-stats/. Removing S17 and W17 gives about 1,100 companies prior to '17

Yes.

(1) is pretty close to being true. Will be true with Uber's $120B valuation

(2) is already true according to the list. Stripe and Instacart alone are already worth > $27B in aggregate

(3) might actually be already true, or at least close to it. Gitlab is worth $1.1B, and there are a few other YC W15 companies that are already worth hundreds of millions and are on track to become unicorns: EquipmentShare, AtomWise, RazorPay, Qventus, GrubMarket, among others.

> edit: There's another possibility here, which is that there are two curves that may have maximized for companies around that time period. The first is the batch size, which has increased from ~10 companies to ~100 over the years. And the other curve is that companies take something like 5-10 years to mature. Maybe it's just that the companies of that vintage are just old enough to be really valuable, and that there were enough companies in the batch to push them to the top of this ranking.

I think that's basically it.

It takes a while to reach a 100M or 1B valuation, so you wouldn't expect to see many of the most recent YC companies on the list just yet. On the flip-side, YC batches were significantly smaller early on before ~2011.

I wouldn't read too much into this distribution.

Interesting to note:

> In addition, we will continue to support the company in the priced equity round in which the safe converts, and subsequent financing rounds (priced equity rounds or bridge financing rounds) by participating in those rounds to approximately maintain our 7% ownership.

This has been the case since 2015 approximately [1]. This means YC's stake in many of these companies is in the order of 10s or even 100s of millions, since they keep their 7% through subsequent funding rounds. That's huge.

[1] https://blog.ycombinator.com/pro-rata/