[morgante]

I'm sure you didn't intend this, but the post ends up sounding very whiny and bitter. Instead of taking the opportunity to reflect on ways you could improve your pitch, you criticize the YC process.

Also, during this critical time and considering the importance of YC partners, 10 minutes of partner time is likely worth more than the $1500 to YC.

[jiggy2011]

Doing the math on that (assuming 8 hour workday 5 days a week, 52 weeks per year) comes to around $9M per year per partner which does seem high to me but I don't know YCs numbers overall.

It makes more sense if you assume that most of their candidates come from within the US and a large % from much closer to YC HQ (Stanford?) so they will pay out significantly less in travel expenses on average.

The only other option would be to give those travelling from further afield longer interviews to pitch their startup which could be seen as unfair.

[morgante]

I get closer to $4.6M/yr per partner. $150068552/4 (there are 4 partners in an interview)

Still seems high, but then you have to take into account that their work is very cyclical in that a lot of important decisions need to be made in this time period.

[smm2000]

I do not think it's just 10 minutes. It's technically impossible to interview 8*6=48 teams a day (10 minutes a team for 8 hours). I think realistic number is 15-20 teams/day because they also need to discuss each team and come to the decision. It means 2-2.5m per partner which is reasonable compensation for highly talented people.

[jiggy2011]

I did the calculation based on 3 partners for some reason. There's probably a limit to how much time any one partner can spend evaluating startups in a given week without burnout too.

[prawn]

It also read as very bitter to me. Puts a lot of the "why we weren't picked" on the interviewers and none really on the site and strategy.

10 minutes is the interview length but it's probably also what you're going to get pitching or trying to convey your plan to potential customers. Less on the web or in radio/TV ads. I imagine that a powerful idea supported by driven people will generally get across quickly.

They also acknowledge that they will miss some future successes - so be it.

[Theodores]

Exactly. A lot of people on this thread have been kind, which is sometimes not honest feedback.

Compare and contrast with Strava, the running and cycling app. Word of it spreads by word of mouth, even amongst those that do not run/cycle. If they have a colleague that uses Strava they tell their cycling/running friends without even seeing it for themselves. Furthermore, Strava has female users, it isn't a boys own gimmick.

This yoga thing should be able to sell itself on the same basis. But in reality it is a slow Drupal desktop site that doesn't really have any stickiness on mobile. Women have been welded to smart phones for five years or so, women do yoga, the app/site should just be a mobile thing for women that the occasional bloke can use on his desktop too. The product has failings. Drawing board failings.

There is nothing wrong in building a community site on Drupal, that is what it is designed for. But doing so does not make you some pioneer of the digital age. Much like using an egg to make an omelette for a meal does not get you a Michelin star.

As a complete newbie, how are you supposed to know what a given style of yoga is? If you are not into it already, yoga is yoga not some foreign restaurant menu where you are magically supposed to know the buzz words. There should be an opportunity here to cut through the buzz words and explain things in a better way than with a footer link that takes you away from where you are.

A process such as YC or a TV talent show has a certain amount of slots = 'we have twenty slots to fill!!!'. Sometimes, regardless of the prize and cost of bringing people into the interview, you need people to make up the numbers. So there may be some stand out contenders but then there is best of the rest, the make-weights. Being invited to attend may mean you applied and the standard of candidates was 'patchy'. It might mean that your idea was better than the guy with the app for oiling his co-founder's girlfriend's spare hamster wheel. It does not mean you are the next Google.

You could decide on whether to back 'Strava' in ten minutes, you would not even need a founder, just a user would do. If you need more than ten minutes the problem is quite fundamental.

All told, rejection in this instance is probably the best thing. There is now hopefully some determination to succeed to spite those nay sayers like myself! More Ramen Noodles and a drawing board is what this project needs, not some VC wanting a return and proper company structure.

[shaolin69]

Thanks very much for this extensive feedback - very helpful! Getting some more noodles now :)

[jader201]

> Also, during this critical time and considering the importance of YC partners, 10 minutes of partner time is likely worth more than the $1500 to YC.

Yeah, it may be worth more to the interviewee, but I think the OP was pointing out that it may be a waste of YC's time, considering they invest $1500 in the process for only 10 minutes of time with the candidates.

[morgante]

I'm not sure if you agree with me? That's precisely my point: I bet YC values its partners' time at more than $1500. Hence the to YC.

[planetjones]

why is it worth more to the interviewee ? meet someone for 10 minutes then fly back to Thailand never to speak or see them again. I think the guy didn't even know the names of many of those on the interview panel. Am I missing something ? Do the interviewers give out their personal contact info, so they can coach his business or something.