Wow, I’m so sorry to hear that. My husband is actually quitting his awesome, well-paid job so we can move back to SF because he really believes in me and my business. Long distance relationships are initially scary, but you can pull it off by staying in daily contact. We have been long distance four times, ranging from three to eight months each time (Toronto-Montreal, Toronto-Paris, Toronto-San Francisco, San Francisco-Los Angeles). We both work in tech and we’ve never wanted to deny each other the opportunity to succeed. It has meant moving cities and countries multiple times, but it has actually made our relationship stronger and our careers much more interesting.
I am a woman and I applied for this round along with my male co-founder. I'm moving back to SF from LA at the end of this year, specifically because I recognize it is a better location for my startup. Although I still have a decent network in the Bay Area to tap back into, I do value the mentorship and camaraderie a program like YC could offer an early stage venture. When I described my startup or did a demo of my app for other people at Startup School, I was impressed by the intellectual generosity. People gave a lot of great feedback, freely. Acceptance by YC won’t make or break my startup, but it would make networking and fundraising a little easier as it implies a certain ‘quality’ stamp.
FYI, if you haven’t read it, Illuminate Ventures’ whitepaper on the performance of female founders in tech relative to male founders, it is an interesting read: http://www.illuminate.com/whitepaper/. You’ll have to request the whitepaper via email, but they respond quickly.
I get the concern about inciting the wrath of music labels. However, can you elaborate on your comment in footnote 5? Is there an unofficial policy of avoiding music startups, or just an extra special sanity check? What if the startup pre-clears (or is in the process of clearing) licensed use of label catalogs before the program?
The copyright problems related to music labels are nothing compared to the legal shenanigans of the contracts between labels and groups. They are horrific. The closest analogies would be share cropping or indentured servitude, though at least there is an out if the band fails.
The way a lot of record labels work is that they will give a band a cash advance. The band uses that advance to pay for living expenses. They are also forced to use it for various costs such as studio time, recording, producing a music video, etc. The band earns a percentage of the gross revenue for album sales (say 7%), the label earns a larger percentage. The band pays back their advance using their share of the earnings. Stop me if it seems like there's something a bit off about this arrangement.
Sending a fledgling startup company to work amidst that hell is not a smart move. Even billionaire multi-platinum bands have trouble.
I agree it is tough to be a band in the era of digital music. I’ll have to respectfully disagree about whether or not our venture is foolhardy. We are early days, but the multiple discussions we’ve had with one major label have been respectful and encouraging.
I think this is a dangerous assertion, and I say this as someone who didn’t finish college and did pretty well financially in the end (alas no successful exits, only market-rate Bay Area startup wages). Only the super motivated, talented, brass-balled or well connected can manage the upstream push against the pervasive social perception - outside of tech centers - you’re second rate if you didn’t finish college.
I think the American education system is broken for a sizeable percentage of kids, from low-quality grade schools all the way through to the outrageous cost of college. For most poor or middle class kids who aren’t in tech, currently they need the exposure to college and they need some additional skills training if they’re to have any hope of getting a decent job after high school. Unfortunately, the esoteric, academic, over-priced world of universities have been turned into the required stepping stone for employment when it is only minimally relevant in many employment sectors. It would be more productive to reinvigorate market-based apprentice programs, revamp junior colleges and redirect some state/federal post secondary education funding to the employee job training credit to truly incentivize employers to take on more entry level employees. Less kids with less debt is a good thing, but they still need skills to be employable. I think it is easy for those of us who are self-directed learners to forget about our peers who really do need training and coaching to succeed.
Like many on this board, learning to code was my meal ticket for years and it is the work world safe haven for those who drop out of/never go to college. I got grilled a lot more about why I didn’t finish college once I moved into code-free jobs. There are millions of university graduates who are unemployed right now. It takes a certain degree of arrogance to pitch your degree-free self as a better candidate than your degreed competitors. I’d never be so smug and delusional about the specificity of my degree-free success to pitch foregoing college in the present economic environment to someone just out of high school. Even when it worked for me.
