tomasdiago

I've read 8,000 Y Combinator applications. You would think the reviewers are thinking through a standard set of questions. Is it a good idea? Is it a large market? Is it an experienced team? Do they have traction? During my time as a reviewer, we went back and tested which questions actually predicted success. The process was look at the best performing companies and then ask whether the application question would disqualify any of the biggest outcomes. If so, eliminate that question. Is it a good idea? Well, Airbnb was a bad idea. Air bed and breakfast. Nobody thought it would work. Is it a large market? Airbnb, Coinbase, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia all started in tiny markets. Experienced team? John and Patrick Collison had no experience in fintech when they built Stripe. Brian Chesky had never built a company. Brian Armstrong was just a product manager. Do they have traction? We learned to invest in slope, not Y intercept. The initial traction doesn't tell you anything about the angle of ascent. Sooooooooooooo...none of these standard questions worked. The best question that predicted success was determination. Who is the most determined? Even if they're not the smartest. Even if the market hasn't developed yet. Even if their initial product is wrong. It outpeformed by a mile. And didn't disqualify the winners. AND was evaluatable. It was so predictive that YC took that one question and found five different ways to ask it.