You missed his point. Yes, what you are doing is replicating the situation that worked for you. And this program is probably a good one for students who are still in college and want to build a company over the summer.
But anyone who has left college and is working for a living should be able to save up one months living expenses every month. (EG: make 25 an hour, gross $4k, $3.6k after taxes, live on $1,500 a month or so.) Thus if you work for 6 months as a contract programmer (or better yet as an employee for a startup) you will then have 6 months of expenses to build your business. Thus there's no reason that not getting YC funding should be an impediment to strting a business.
The strong impression I get from people who post here, and the people who attented startupschool is that they are focused on getting funding. They want to go to YC, or move to the bay area for connections to funding. Landing a VC deal is seen as the end goal.
This is not an entreprenurial focus. Were you focused on VC funding for viaweb, or were you trying to build a business?
The original poster is right-- build a business-- that should be the focus. Not getting funding. Not worrying about what you're going to do if you don't get into YC. YC should be seen as a possible opportunity, but not critical to success.
And since YC only happens twice a year and is limited in the number accepted... waiting for the next round of YC indicates that building the business or product is not the number one priority.
As an investor, I'd rate highly someone who was living off of their own savings to build their product-- they have shown the gumption and have even more skin in the game.
I was 30 when we started Viaweb, and I needed the money.
Viaweb raised a total of $2.5 million during its life. Some of the time I was focused on funding. Investors like you to be, when you're asking for that much.
It's ridiculous to suggest that one has a choice of focusing on funding or building a business. Pretty nearly 100% of successful startups take outside funding, from Google on down.
"When we started our startup in 1995, the first three were our biggest expenses. We had to pay $5000 for the Netscape Commerce Server, the only software that then supported secure http connections. We paid $3000 for a server with a 90 MHz processor and 32 meg of memory. And we paid a PR firm about $30,000 to promote our launch.
Now you could get all three for nothing. You can get the software for free; people throw away computers more powerful than our first server; and if you make something good you can generate ten times as much traffic by word of mouth online than our first PR firm got through the print media."
I believe Microsoft never took funding. There might be a few others. Anybody know? Apple? That wouldn't make sense. I can't recall the numbers off the top of my head.
From what I read, Microsoft took a mezzanine round before IPO because VCs have connections to investment bankers, and Microsoft needed investment bankers to make the IPO process run smoothly. So yeah, it basically was a bribe.
Yes, but I meant to imply that they never raised money at the startup stage (and up until IPO...). Microsoft was almost entirely self-funding before going public, except for the money they received that PG mentions, which I never knew about.
True, but Microsoft and every startup has a specific set of circumstances that may be exclusive to their situation, whether it be timing (late 1970s), competitive landscape (big slothful IBM), location (being able to live in low-cost Albuquerque and still get clients), etc. To base your entire future around what worked for Bill Gates and Paul Allen in 1980 may not be the wisest decision.
PG et al. were not college students when they started ViaWeb. Actually, I think they were significantly older than the median YC-funded founder.
That said, I'm a little curious about the money aspect too. I had no problem saving up more than $15k. I could easily self-fund my startup for a while. I'm far more interested in YC because it brings together smart people from across the world and fosters the sort of environment you'd see in a hacker lab or math competition.
But anyone who has left college and is working for a living should be able to save up one months living expenses every month. (EG: make 25 an hour, gross $4k, $3.6k after taxes, live on $1,500 a month or so.) Thus if you work for 6 months as a contract programmer (or better yet as an employee for a startup) you will then have 6 months of expenses to build your business. Thus there's no reason that not getting YC funding should be an impediment to strting a business.
The strong impression I get from people who post here, and the people who attented startupschool is that they are focused on getting funding. They want to go to YC, or move to the bay area for connections to funding. Landing a VC deal is seen as the end goal.
This is not an entreprenurial focus. Were you focused on VC funding for viaweb, or were you trying to build a business?
The original poster is right-- build a business-- that should be the focus. Not getting funding. Not worrying about what you're going to do if you don't get into YC. YC should be seen as a possible opportunity, but not critical to success.
And since YC only happens twice a year and is limited in the number accepted... waiting for the next round of YC indicates that building the business or product is not the number one priority.
As an investor, I'd rate highly someone who was living off of their own savings to build their product-- they have shown the gumption and have even more skin in the game.