Hacker News Reader

Comment by bherms | Hacker News Reader

I would say spend more time developing a solid prototype and use that time to find a co-founder. You can't be perfect and there has to be someone out there to compensate for your own weaknesses. With a good prototype, it should be much easier to attract a co-founder and the added time should allow you to really make it solid and increase your chances of getting into YC.

edit: Keep in mind applying isn't a binding, one-time-only thing. It's not like you can't apply for the next round if you don't get in this one.

View on HN

Thank you for the input. Yes, I understand that we can apply multiple times. What is a bit annoying is that yc does not seem to give any feedback. I understand that it is hard to give feedback on so many applications - but even a one liner feedback (e.g. "liked the idea but single founder is an issue" would be very useful and would perhaps motivate folks like me who are missing one or more "attributes" of successful application.

I think they don't do that because giving such feedback might be interpreted as a conditional acceptance. In other words, people might expect to be accepted after they fix that. By not giving feedback they likely avoid a large amount of correspondence and arguing, even if that makes it a bit harder on the applicants.

I understand that but I believe all of that can be addressed by making it very clear on the outset (things like the feedback is just fyi, we wont respond back to your feedback on feedback) yada yada...I do think that it is a hard choice for yc but it would very worthwhile for the applicants. Any feedback is better than no feedback, IMHO.

Maybe some generous group of YC vets could put together a little club to review denied applications/companies and offer feedback? That could be beneficial to both YC and the founders.

Interesting idea. Personally, I prefer to hear back feedback from the actual application process itself - it is more efficient in many ways.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com