YC has funded scummy companies before. InstallMonetizer comes to mind.
In their defense, I don't think YC claims to not find scummy shit. To me it seems that they have a moral compass comparable most financial institutions, i.e. none.
YC isn't responsible for the actions of the founders of every start-up that they fund. Even worse: after funding them they have very limited ability to influence the companies they funded, after all, YC has a small minority stake and founders could just ignore them. Obviously YC can cut them off from further capital and blackball them but that may not be sufficient.
Advice and a little bit of seed capital does not constitute "a central organization directing the economics." I think your conception of what YC does for accepted companies is pretty far from reality.
Of course, but they're liable to damage their reputation as a VC firm if they continue funding garbage without vetting it at all, just cause someone's techbro buddy asked nicely for YC's backing.
It doesn't matter. YC isn't some not for profit BS. They're not handing out free money. If its a beauty contest, it's because they think the start ups are beautiful.
Expect them to take a half a million dollar bet on you based on their own metrics; as scientific or gut as they allow. Just because you think they're dog shit doesn't mean they are. And some partner at YC saw something in them and _that's_ what matters, no?
These days, being associated with the YC brand is at least as valuable as the mentoring for the purposes of raising money. I don't think that's necessarily a good thing for these emerging companies and founders.
reply