[valleycynic]

Read their own terms. They don't provide you with office space, living space, or other necessities that even other, less vaunted incubators do. And the seed money used to much lower: $17,000 (a few months salary).

Again, 7% is an enormous chunk of a company, and for a firm like Dropbox, such a stake runs easily into the millions. YC on its face has always been a terrible deal, except it isn't, because YC is the first step in a sequence that ends with you getting bought by Facebook or Google regardless of whether you actually deserve it, and that's why people sign up--not to hear advice from Sam Altman.

And I wasn't devaluing Susan's work at all. My point was that for other women with similar ambition and talent but without similar financial independence, YC would be a non-starter.

[ig1]

It doesn't make sense to evaluate historic seed stage valuation based on current valuation. Any angel investment looks like a bad deal retrospectively for a billion dollar company on that basis.

Investments need to be evaluated on the basis of the valuation at time of investment.

Certainly there are many companies who could raise money at higher valuations elsewhere who go through YC, but almost none of them could raise at a >$15m valuation (YC doesn't typically invest in post-A companies).

[jscheel]

Financial stability is always an issue for founders. Any founder that has an alternative source of income, a large reserve of liquid cash, or a small living expense (NOT a family to feed), is going to have more flexibility.

[ajju]

"that ends with you getting bought by Facebook or Google regardless of whether you actually deserve it"

..and this is because Facebook and Google are not independent companies with their own self-interest at heart, but stooges of YC remote controlled by a secret cabal of YC alumni?