Hacker News Reader

Comment by wavesplash | Hacker News Reader

From what I understand, that's not the YC model at all. YC takes a bet on the team w/ zero prior coaching and the company can turn down YC - no obligation. If the company says yes, then dinners, coaching, etc. commence.

Clean, simple, no misalignment.

It seems that Seedcamp is goofy by front loading the deliverables but won't commit to the investment. That's awkward for the mentors and the companies that are accepted/obliged to take whatever deal is given to them.

That feels like a poor place to negotiate vaulation from, and a major misalignment for the non-investing mentors.

View on HN

Saul Klein: "Y Combinator, by virtue of being in the valley, has a built-in network, a built-in infrastructure. In Europe, we got none of that ... We have a real problem of fragmentation, so Seedcamp was really trying to solve for that issue as much as anything else, bringing people together in a cohesive network." http://tr.im/zLzH

That's why there are lots of networking and mentoring events (local Mini-Seedcamps, Seedcamp week) up front that many dozens of teams profit from, even though only 5-7 receive an investment.

I'm sure the selected teams aren't actually legally obliged to take whatever deal is offered, at least it wasn't at all that way for us last year.

"I'm sure the selected teams aren't actually legally obliged to take whatever deal is offered, at least it wasn't at all that way for us last year."

Can someone confirm this? It seems as if this is a recent change.

I'm pretty sure that you can't sign away such rights. It's very simple: as CEO, don't sign any more papers. What is SeedCamp going to do? Force a financing on you? I don't think so.

It's ok for them to strongly warn you that you shouldn't approach them if you are not interested in taking their money. Why waste their time?

On the other hand, cold feet is always acceptable.

It's called a covenant of good faith.

As I understand things, this was a change from last year, specifically because some of the teams rejected the terms that they were given in the past.

Sounds like they need to make their terms public in the same way YC does: http://ycombinator.com/seriesaa.html

Those aren't the YC terms. The YC terms are given to teams after they're invited for an interview.

"some of the teams rejected the terms that they were given in the past."

If some startup founders rejected 50,000 Euros and great advisers, for a 5-10% share , there is something broken in the model. At least from the pov of the (vetted, chosen) people doing the rejecting if 50,000 Euros is not providing enough value they ae well within their rights to reject it.

Fixing the broken parts may pay off more than making arbitrary rules that people have to accept whoever puts up 50k Euros. This is like saying people have to accept jobs because "we put so much effort into interviewing you". Such rules are probably unenforceable anyway and make the proposers look like idiots.

Why would you say "whoever puts up 50k Euros"? Seedcamp Investments LLP does.

"whoever puts up 50k Euros" covers Seedcamp LLP.The key concept is putting pressure on people to accept.

My (simple) point is that people should be able to sign or not as they please, without psychlogical pressure to do so.

If people back off, figure out why and fix it vs "changing the rules this year" or whatever)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com