This is silly. Sad to see that startups are being thought as some sort of game/entertainment. Nobody who is serious about building a company needs to actually go through all this.
I cannot imagine YC's own employees will go through this process should they start a company of their own. I thought the previous experiment was borderline amusement but this has totally crossed the line.
Has YC somehow convinced itself that it's all a lottery and there is no point trying to evaluate start ups using normal methods?
I have tried using snapchat 3 times and found it frustrating to use. I have no friends using it. Because of this post, I gave it another try and followed Justin Khan and other tech entrepreneurs. I must say I finally know a bit about why it is such a big deal. I spent like an hour during the past 7 hours watching other people's stories. It is kind of addictive. I love Justin's snapstorm on founder burnout and how to avoid it. It feels very personal and casual. Justin, please ignore the negativities and keep being awesome.
The amount of friction a user goes through to start documenting their life is extremely low, and since the stories get deleted there's no real commitment to be an active vlogger. It's easy to see why Justin is so active on it.
It's a powerful platform that an entire generation uses, and it seems like the applicants will still go through formal interviews. So it's simply a way to bring attention to YC.
Would a YouTube video pitch 10 years ago be silly?
Would applying over email in 1995 be silly?
Maybe back then, but think about how applying to incubators is done now.
Maybe Snapchat will never reach the level of popularity of either of those, but it never hurts to experiment, because it's experimentation that turned YC into one of the top incubators.
I just urged a local startup here to apply. Told her that I'd bet the prevailing attitude on HN would be that it was a joke. Fewer applicants gives her a much better chance to be noticed.
I'm way older than Snapchat's target demographic but I love it. Few people from the startup world on there but the quality of the advice is high.
If there was one thing that I wish I had had drilled into me in college it would be regular expressions. If I could have had two things drilled into me I'd choose regexes and importance of likability.
I've watched a lot of very talented people languish just because they weren't "likable" enough. Not because they were bad people, but because they weren't interested in blogging, networking at meet ups, getting thousands of Twitter followers, or in making an email any less terse than it absolutely needed to be.
I've also seen people with terrible ideas or lackluster execution get massive amounts support because they approached likability as a skill and mastered it.
I couldn't imagine doing this at the YCF stage.
Effectively pitching over SnapChat requires a type of media training that most early stage founders won't have. It's hard to pitch in person, even harder to pitch when you're using a medium you've only used to send dumb stuff to your friends. I know I'm much better in person than I am on video so I don't even bother trying to raise money from firms that require a video upfront.
Likability and presentation are massively important, but I'd rather spend my early days building a product that works well than anxiously grasping at likability on SnapChat. There are so many great writers and media people out there, build something great, then bring them in to help you sell it.
Guys, this isn't about finding a new funnel for YC to attract new companies, this is about entertainment. Look at the success of the startup podcast [1], which is very high on the itunes charts and not coincidentally just featured a very entertaining story about the early years of Justin.tv. People not involved in startups are very interested in how the whole startup scene works, and this is just another way to give them a glimpse into it.
Is this a good thing to do if you are a startup? Probably not. Any time you are spending preparing or participating in this event is time you aren't spending actually making your company better, not to mention how large a distraction it would be.
Apply HN, which was also an experiment from YC, just finished. The results were highly contested due to ambiguous rules and vote brigading.
This experiment is doing the same thing, with a preselection process and communication medium with zero transparency. And the end result is a chance at an interview instead of guaranteed admission!
This seems like an experiment that is quirky for the sake of being quirky. That is never good. (I had to research "Snapfam" since I've never heard of the term: the only influential account that uses the term is Justin).
I wholeheartedly agree. It almost sounds like a pitch for a reality TV show. Honestly, I think it reflects poorly on YC's brand image to run experiments that seem to add nothing to the typical startup vetting process; this one more so than the last.
I don't understand. The very nature of experimentation is to figure out whether it adds anything to the process. It's impossible to sit and gestate about all the possible ramifications.
I'm not a snapchatter (snapper?), but hey, crazier things have worked swimmingly. Go Justin!
I agree as well. I'm trying to figure out what this format adds to the startup vetting process. It's almost like a weird social media version of Shark Tank with a behind-closed-doors pre-selection process. I feel like what YCF really needs a competition for is the best idea for finding and vetting YCF participants.
I know that some people's (mine this year) application videos didn't register any viewings so I guess it is a way to guarantee your video is viewed.
That said, as a human, it is okay to have some fun with your job. I imagine these experiments might be both a way to do something differently as well as possibly be a learning experience.
Also, I imagine some of them might be pitched by complete strangers as they buy their coffee or do their grocery shopping. So this might be a more controlled version of that.
How is that different to the regular HN application process?
You put in your application, it gets filtered by somebody who was a previous alum (or maybe you had contacts that put in a good word) and maybe you get an invite.
I'm not in any way railing against the process, that's just the way it is. If you don't like it, don't play.
One of the ApplyHN entries, AJsAmericanGarage, actually made a coherent 8 minute video presentation, and at the time, I don't think any other entry had anything remotely similar. This seems like a less rigorous offshoot of the concept that AJsAmericanGarage attempted to use. In the ApplyHN context it seemed an innovative approach to both showing creativity and personality (doing something nobody else was doing), whereas this sounds like a platform for...I dunno...much more of a popularity contest thing.
On the other hand, it could be really fun! Stories are limitless vehicles for creativity and self expression. Some were complaining before about the character limit. Video is much more intimate.
My only issue is that I don't think I'll have the time to view 100+ snaps ;(
Is it widely considered mature to leave a fortune 500 to start up a company with some friends??? Perhaps some of you have forgotten what this field is all about. Off the beaten path. I hate that the start up community is now being diluted by these gold rush khaki wearing know it alls that I knew back in the acct department...
Lastly, and this goes for anyone or anything you're being critical of. Please state your accomplishments/accolades prior to your negative spiels so as to save us time.
> Lastly, and this goes for anyone or anything you're being critical of. Please state your accomplishments/accolades prior to your negative spiels so as to save us time.
You think it's better to judge ideas by the mouths from which they come than their actual content? This seems like the wrong attitude.
Okay, sure, I'll bite because I genuinely think it's juvenile. First, I actually read through the posting and it was essentially "Hey I've been playing with this new toy and through it I think we can give away money" and...that's kind of it. For me, it doesn't resonate like a thought-out, well considered pathway or process.
And, because you apparently think it matters, I'll go ahead and state my accomplishments and accolades just to show that I'm not some homeless posting from the library charity case.
Gainfully employed for 15+ years
Several Academic Scholarships
Two University Degrees
2 Full Music Albums
10+ EPs
Certified in a foreign language
Published author
Freelancer in several fields
Accomplished B2B Project Manager in Mid to Fortune 500 companies
Accomplished in Finance, Healthcare, and Risk Management fields
...and I know that it's poor form to end a sentence in a preposition, so if I'm going to be critical of something, then I'm going to think it through, be reasonable, and use appropriate language to convey it. So, when I think the Snapchat idea is juvenile, I mean it. Your criticism is pretty much founded in trying to keep things juvenile, so, like I said earlier, have fun with that.
Let me go against the grain here and say: there's nothing wrong with this idea! Sounds like a fun way for several startups to get visibility (more power to them), Justin to broaden YC's visibility, and to encourage a few startups to be visually creative in a way that they wouldn't be able to on a normal application. YC doesn't have a quota for its current programs, so it's not zero-sum.
There are tons of mature adults that use Snapchat for normal communication with friends.
And the "lack of transparency" criticism is just looking for anything to criticize YC for. If anything, there's more transparency than the normal YC process because the runners-up are publicly known and exposed to community comments.
I understand the negative sentiment around these experiments from YC at some level.
But YC lives & dies by the quality of their "funnel", so to speak.
If they miss the next Airbnb because they overlook them or don't have a broad enough funnel in the first place that will cripple YC's ability to grow.
These experiments are part of YC's inevitable scaling challenges that are analog to any successful startup -> your platform is tested & proven, your current growth engine is reliable but you want to keep going faster.
So what do you do?
Find new marketing channels, experiment with new products (line extension), test new "funnels" to drive through a higher ratio of succesful outcomes.
Good on yah YC for eating the dogfood you're selling :)
Have the naysayers actually watched Justin on Snapchat? There is quality content and everyone could learn a thing or two from him about marketing and consistent content creation. This is basically how JTV got traction and press. Also, regular YC apps require a video anyway so this fits well with the model they are used to.
You can even learn how to get other people to create free content for your channel!
I don't disagree that Juatin knows how to market and create quality content. What I don't understand is why someone who wants to start a successful company would spend their time doing this. Why not spend time building the company?
The snaps also get posted online after the contest - doesn't that defeat the purpose of Snapchat?! It's not a good medium for this.
- For those who say that good founders should spend their time working on their startup and nothing gimmicky like this; If you get to appear on this snapchat and it takes your 6 hours to prepare for it (way too long in my opinion). Justin has over 7500 views per snap, that's 7500 people that learn about your startup and a couple thousand that may be directed to you website, it's them up to the credibility of your website/app to convert them to signups. What else would you do to gain an audience of 7500 ardent tech fans in those 6hrs? My project was once featured on his channels months ago and we got hundreds of new users because of that.
- someone mentioned shitty ideas getting attention because of likable founders and good ideas not getting attention because of unlikebale founders. I'd say it's in the best interest to have a good idea and be likable, startups are a very competitive market, you should look for every edge you can have over the next guy. Not fair buts that's the way it is.
- YCF provides lots of value for very early startups, it's only fair that they get some value back immediately considering it's a risky bet and their stake only converts at a $100 million event. If the value is entertainment that gets them more exposure (good for sourcing deals), I'd say it's a fair trade off.
- For those who say it's a waste of time, I think that's pretty pessimistic. Any oppurtunity to get funded by a reputable entity is never a waste of time. You are a startup, you are unconventional. The odds are not in your favor, if you have to shine shoes to get the attention of what/who you want, I say do it. Lots of successful people have done so. It's the type of "I am too good to do this" hubris that makes some people frown on SV culture being cultivated in some founders
I can go on, but I'd rather work on my startup or get some rest, that way I can free up time to apply. Good luck!
No idea how this will go. But I used to watch his Snap stories. They're a pretty good balance of insight and various personal things he does. Overall, I kind of just enjoyed how positive and motivated he seemed to be. Seems like a genuinely good dude.
If you didn't read the post, you can follow him [here](1). I definitely recommend checking it out at least. Nice to see the optimism when you're doing your batshit crazy start-up thing and need a bit of healthy validation.
I'm going to start off by saying that I'm only 16 so in no world am I an expert on what I'm saying... I feel that what Justin is doing is a brilliant way to make receiving funding more approachable to small startups without them having to get up on stage in front of a couple hundred people or sit in a dull boardroom. If you think about it, putting someone on a stage at tech crunch disrupt isn't too different from what Justin is doing. TCD is just more nerve-racking. Does everyone suddenly hate that now? Speaking from first hand account, being a small start-up with a super young person in charge (I refer you to where I mentioned where I'm 16) it's pretty hard to be taken seriously and approach VCs. This makes the process a little more relaxed an a little less stressful for people like me. Also who's to say you can't have fun in some parts of your job? Tech is already total lala land anyway... What other industry has ping pong meetings and free Starbucks all the time? I really see no downside to this venture except for it being "unconventional" which we in the startup wornow all know to be pre-greatness. (I kinda loosely stole that pre-greatness part from silicon valley). Thanks for hearing me out. -harry
It's a fun idea. I'm looking forward to watching the pitches. Even the startups that don't win will get free publicity. I've downloaded apps because of Justin's ProductHunt reviews. I give it 5/5 Klausses.
P.S. followed you on snapchat because of this thread. Your stories are endearing, and agree with you getting the message out through whatever medium. HN and snapchat may be orthogonal though
As an ardent snapchat user, I can tell you that there's this upcoming swell from the VC world to be "cool" on the app, mostly driven by Justin and Mark Suster. FWIW, I think we all need a little more entertainment in our daily lives ("why so serious?"), though this probably isn't the best expression of that. Then again, aren't we supposed to "disrupt" and "innovate" and "do shit that scares you" and all that jazz?
I thought ApplyHN was an interesting experiment. Had some issues, of course, but at least fundamentally sound. Lessons could be learned, and if tried again, the process will likely improve.
When I read through this summary of the concept, I was struggling to think of a word to describe my generally negative impression, and I think I finally found it: Juvenile. This souds so very, very juvenile. Good luck to whomever wants to go this route. Pass.
it's hilarious to me how many people are upset with YC experimenting with snapchat. what are pitches about? explaining your startup/idea in a easy to understand manner.
What do snaps do? force content to be valuable in a constrained amount of time, making it a great way to practice your elevator pitch. if it's not interesting, next snap.
Will justin and co solely base their decision on the snap story? of course not. it's just a fun way to try something new.
I always try to control myself about posting negative comments, but man... I'm getting tired of this glamorization about entrepreneurship, and sadly YC is having more and more responsibility on this.
I wasn't calling him names, I was calling the Snapchat Pitch Competition stupid.
He called the same thing Juvenile, how is that adding information. Again, read my comment.
If you have a substantive critique to make, you're welcome to make it, but this is the kind of comment HN can use none of, regardless of one's opinion about Snapchat.
Despite any problems that might exist with this particular approach to evaluating venture capital opportunities, if you still think Snapchat is primarily about sharing racy photos, I'm sorry.
This is the way that nearly all of my (admittedly younger) friends communicate now. It has the media integration depth of all the other social media services, if not more, and the candidness of a casual conversation. There are few better ultra-modern user experiences for us.
While I agree with you to be funny the truth is Snapchat is the new, hip way many youngsters are communicating. Many celebrities and personalities are gaining huge followings on it and even generating revenue based on their audience.
Look at Gary Vee or really half the VCs / angels in silicon valley. They're all on it. It's huge!
The "Snapchat is for nudes!!!" joke is really an outsider thing. It really isn't used for those kinds of pics much more than text or even Facebook. Either way people will screenshot so it's the same as those two.
An "outsider" thing? I've used it quite extensively and understand its nuanced differences from other offerings. That said, its a fancy messenger app that is a huge battery hog, and crashes and lags constantly. It's not really deviating from the image that it's built by frat-boys.
One thing I do admire about it is that it deletes the content. This allows me to be more "free" and take shitty pictures of myself just to utilize the fun parts (videos, stories, object tracking / emojis, and lenses).
But in the end, I find myself wanting to create content I'd want to share with my Facebook network. Sure, it's ephemeral nature allows me to communicate freely with closer friends than on Facebook, and in a more immediate sense, but I don't see how this is any different than any other messaging app with fancy "message format" features.
Except it deletes content. It feeds into the insecurities of today's youth, and shelters them from consequences of their own actions. Of course it would spread like wild fire. It's the safe space that college students thought Facebook was before people realized everything stuck around forever.
So outside of the funny lenses and stories, the main attraction is deleting content. So either your insecure, or you're sending dick pics.
I expect to be outspoken about this, but its simply my take. If you disagree, you can respect my opinion by not down voting me for it.
Honestly I agree with most of your opinion. I do disagree however with this portion:
> So either your insecure, or you're sending dick pics.
While deleting is a big draw I think you're presenting a false choice. Deleting content creates scarcity and a more live experience. Granted it's artificial and to me it's frustrating because I like to keep all content I create, even if it sucks.
I think that coupled with the lack of discoverablity creates more intiment experiences and people are eating it up regardless of the app problems.
I cannot imagine YC's own employees will go through this process should they start a company of their own. I thought the previous experiment was borderline amusement but this has totally crossed the line.
Has YC somehow convinced itself that it's all a lottery and there is no point trying to evaluate start ups using normal methods?