[latexr]

> YC, like most incubators, has always encouraged their companies to use products and services from other companies in their portfolio.

Advising unproven risky businesses to depend on other unproven risky businesses? Doesn’t that just increase the likelihood that something goes wrong?

[Aurornis]

> Advising unproven risky businesses to depend on other unproven risky businesses?

Read carefully: They’re not actually advising that startups prefer it. They’re allowing it as an option.

It doesn’t mean that it will actually be used. They just don’t want to appear like they’re avoiding the companies they’re funding. It’s a bad look.

[latexr]

I think you are confused. I don’t care about the announcement, I’m specifically addressing a point from my parent comment, which I quoted. Again, this time with emphasis:

> YC, like most incubators, has always encouraged (…)

“Encouraging” means advising, advocating for, not “allowing as an option”. I don’t know if YC really does that, but that’s the conversation. It’s about the claim made in a comment, not the submission.

[Aurornis]

Re-read what I wrote: The "encouraged" was about past use of other products, to provide context. I wasn't claiming they encouraged the use of stablecoins. I was adding historical context to the move.

[latexr]

> The "encouraged" was about past use of other products, to provide context.

Yes, I understood that perfectly.

> I wasn't claiming they encouraged the use of stablecoins.

Neither have I claimed you did.

> I was adding historical context to the move.

Yes, I know. All my answers are congruent with that.

[jazzyjackson]

Does anyone remember being voluntold to use Skiff for email and calendar, instead of a product that actually handles timezones in event invites?

I'm convinced the point of YC must be something other than launching successful businesses

[bombcar]

I mean it’s obvious that successful businesses are only a side effect of what the point is - a successful exit. And if one big success can be strongarmed to help other ventures exit successfully, they’ll do it.

Why wouldn’t they?

[thaneross]

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Nevermark]

Would you consider it risky for a startup to use its own product?

I would consider that a risk decreaser, because the loop creates a stronger fit signal.

Even more powerful, since across a cohort the encouragement is N-way, or really N^2-way, it actually lowers risk on average the more startups act as each others’ early customers.

And co-adopters benefit from getting unusually responsive suppliers with a strong indirect stake in mutual success.

Encourage isnt a requirement. Adopt only if it makes sense.

[remus]

From the POV of YC, they don't mind too much if it is a bit risky for any given individual company if it increases the legitimacy and stability of their portfolio as a whole.

[direwolf20]

The already 99.9% likelihood?