[emmett]

It's obvious that there is some upper limit of companies per batch, past which it will be impossible for YC to source quality companies and advisors for batches. But why should we believe we've hit the point where the quality of advisors and peers decline as YC gets bigger? There are a lot more than 300 companies started per year...YC still only makes up a small fraction of the total. (And anecdotally just looking at this batch...I wouldn't care to bet that the quality of peers has decreased!)

[hi]

> But why should we believe we've hit the point where the quality of advisors and peers decline as YC gets bigger?

We shouldn't, it's the exact opposite. As the network grows, the ecosystem of high quality advisors goes up, not just because better people join, but people are learning to become better advisors through being a part of the network. Not only that, but as the network grows so does the YC economy of potential partners. Instead of YC companies purchasing goods and services from outside the network (and thus bleeding valuation of the network) keeping money flowing in the YC economy only accelerates the value of the entire network. As this monetary flow through the network grows and accelerates so does the quality of the people managing the companies in the networks and thus potential future advisors to new companies joining the network.

[robotresearcher]

... until every person in the world is simultaneously an advisor and a peer and total value of being in the network is maximized for each individual.

Really?

[nend]

You write like these are guaranteed outcomes, but organizations lose their ability to deliver value as they grow all the time, which is where startups come in...

Granted YC is probably more aware of these downfalls than most companies, and are trying to mitigate them, but to act like YC can only get better as it expands is really short sighted.

I'm sure every person on this board can think of dozens of companies that failed because they got too big and could no longer deliver value as well as smaller companies. The tech space is littered with them every year.

[vram22]

>but organizations lose their ability to deliver value as they grow all the time, which is where startups come in...

>I'm sure every person on this board can think of dozens of companies that failed because they got too big and could no longer deliver value as well as smaller companies. The tech space is littered with them every year.

Yes to both points. And so is the business (management) consulting and literature space littered with stuff, a.k.a. work and talks and books and confs about all that. Throwing out a few words that give a flavor:

Disruption (ha!), Clayton Christensen, Tom Peters, reengineering, innovator's dilemma, the HP way, Lou Gerstner, Teaching Elephants to Dance, Jack Welch, the HP Way, the IBM Way, the Toyota Way, Made in America, Made in Japan, etc. Tip of the iceberg.