Startups that launched at Y Combinator’s W19 Demo Day 1

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I'm saying (poorly) that I miss getting excited about new startups launching. This is probably more of a reflection of my own shift in perception than it is a statement on YC or incubators as a whole.

Like the u/giarc commented. What makes bento so different than all the food delivery services that came before it? There’s nothing unique about it.

1) everything that’s already in the world when you’re born is just normal;

2) anything that gets invented between then and before you turn thirty is incredibly exciting and creative and with any luck you can make a career out of it;

3) anything that gets invented after you’re thirty is against the natural order of things and the beginning of the end of civilization as we know it until it’s been around for about ten years when it gradually turns out to be alright really.

I can't stand this template anymore. There's probably a natural cycle/rise-and-fall for these things.

1) Problem identified, "how do i quickly and efficiently describe the purpose of what we're doing"

2) "[existing popular company everyone knows] for [different market that it can be applied to]" is passed on to others to solve that problem. Phrase becomes popular, more people start using it.

3) Everyone starts using it, phrase becomes overused.

4) People begin questioning whether it still has the same meaning or if it's changed contexts since it was originally suggested.

5) People despise hearing it.

I'm right around step 4 there at the moment, heading towards 5. All I keep thinking is "so you're using the same phrase everyone uses, yet you're telling me you're revolutionary, and groundbreaking."

I get that it's just one phrase, and I'm starting to make assumptions here, but I think at some point it becomes more formulaic. And it's hard for me to believe you're hacking, innovating, and revolutionizing when you're following a formula. It's just more "I'm in-the-club" language now.

For a brief, golden period, startups were new and innovative. You could stand out from the crowd by taking some risk and working hard. Early YC reflected this ethos.

Now, “startups” are so common as to trigger cynicism, and merely starting a company no longer offers differentiation. Every angle that can be explored is being explored, usually by multiple scrappy, identically hustling teams of millenials, and to differentiate, you need to take risks that feel increasingly long-shot to stand out (e.g. nuclear fusion! electric planes! revolutionizing drug discovery!) Even the seed-stage “accelerators” are systematized, large-scale success-mining machines for fairly well-developed companies.

Which is not to say that there won’t be successes; there will almost certainly be “unicorns” from 2019, as there have been in just about every year. But the frontier is closed, the game is clear, and it’s the same as it ever was.

Not sure why they did that to be honest, giving someone $10k to apply is probably the best way to decrease application quality and have more work to sort through. Maybe for more data?

I worded my original comment poorly.

It's a $5 Trillion dollar company.

This, and the 'male contraceptive with no side-effects' are 'magic claims' style companies, where if their claims are true, they immediately massive companies.

Usually, the devil is in the details. A few little things here and there contextualize the claims.

Think of how many smart people we have working on big problems and how few real breakthroughs we have.

These things will mostly be evolutionary. Like 'male contraceptive' but it actually does have the side effect of long-term problems. Or takes a year to wear off. Or is $20 a pop and last for 1 hour. Or is only 95% effective. Etc. etc..

As for the revenue – there are certainly cool opportunities to run relevant ads when you have high levels of attention from someone and their close friends (think group experiences, people buying things at the same time that their friends, etc). That said, we don't like what ads have done to current social platforms. They misalign incentives where the more money the product makes, the worse the product tends to get for users. Snapchat was pretty fun until it went from only seeing friends to seeing celebrity gossip and repetitive ads. Because of that, we're planning on doing a subscription model down the road, similar to what WhatsApp tried out before it got acquired (first year free, then a small fee.) Certainly a new model for a social app, but we think it's the best direction for us long-term.

3) Bus

4) Kid Walks/cycles themself

5) Mom drives them herself

With these already being available options, I don't understand why anyone would be trying to solve what appears to me to be a solved problem, getting kids to school.

If they essentially do "MealPal, but delivered," then I could see it working. Noticeable price point difference from other delivery options, but maintaining a range of restaurant meal options for people to choose from.

But yeah, they look like sink or swim based largely on what price they can offer consumers

The other bento started out trying to make the meals themselves but couldnt make them cheap enough. They were losing money on every one sold. Eventually, if I remember right, they tried to pivot to a service like this that got meals from restaurants, but didnt fair much better. They were doing last mile delivery though if I recall.

[1] https://www.gimletmedia.com/startup/kitchen-confidential-sea...