If that founder is a director of engineering/product in an enterprise software company in Atlanta, has a spouse, two kids and a mortgage, and the health insurance is dependent on her/his employer, then they will probably have a higher sacrifice than if they are a single Stanford grad living in SF with a year of saving after working at Google. They both need to make a sacrifice but it's not the same scale. If you make it easier for the enterprise founder to go and do it, and they know their industry and customers from the inside out, I think YC are increasing their odds a little bit of getting an enterprise software unicorn then if they don't. Nothing is guaranteed, and that enterprise person will have to make even worse sacrifices probably if they gets funded, but I'm pretty sure it will increase the number of them who will make the leap.
However as Sam said he doesn't feel they are underrepresented, and that they can use the fellowship which sounds great :)
Can anybody name a few successful high-growth startups that were started by people with these kinds of family obligations?
If it has happened before, that's evidence that it can happen again, but if it's never happened before, that's evidence that it may be harder or impossible to form a high-growth startup under obligations like those.
(Disclaimer: high-growth startups are not the only kind of business worth forming. The director of engineering of a slow-growth enterprise software company may have a higher quality of life than a co-founder at an unprofitable unicorn.)
Why doesn't a director have enough money saved up to support their family for at least three months? And I knew Navy folks who were away from their families for months at a time, so it is definitely possible (if not fun) to do this. But if you're becoming an entrepreneur for the fun, it's time to question your motives.
I'm guessing you don't have a wife and children. It isn't about the money, it's about not seeing them.
You are also forgetting that it isn't just your sacrifice in terms of the time you are giving up with your wife and children for three months, but also that you are forcibly restricting them from being able to see you too. They didn't choose that.
Once you have a family you have a bunch of responsibilities and you've signed up for life. You can't just pick and choose when it suits you.
I realise that there are a lot of young folks on HN and probably not so many parents, so I'm expecting a barrage of down votes, but maybe in ten years time when you've reached my perspective you'll come back and upvote me!
I was raised by a single mother, in part because my father didn't want the overhead of raising kids. I know many other people like that (or other similar situations like parents voluntarily enlisting in the military). Obviously an anecdote with sample size n=1, but different people make the choice of prioritizing different areas of life based on what makes them happy.
But I think for you it is clear that family comes before business. Which is a fine personal choice for you, but is it the kind of choice people putting their money in your business want to see you making?
> You are also forgetting that it isn't just your sacrifice in terms of the time you are giving up with your wife and children for three months, but also that you are forcibly restricting them from being able to see you too. They didn't choose that.
“He who would accomplish little need sacrifice little; he who would achieve much must sacrifice much. He who would attain highly must sacrifice greatly.”
I wouldn't bet on a founder who is not willing to take on risks. I am not being judgmental, I'm just saying whoever complains about this should face the reality--The reality is that there are tons of other people who are as qualified as this person who ARE willing to take that kind of risks. All things equal, there's no reason why VCs should fund people who don't want to take risks.
Leaving your area for three months isn't taking on risks. I'm sure YC would be foaming at the mouth to take basecamp and if they could start over with the ability to apply to YC I'm sure DHH and Jason would still turn it down if they were required to go to SF.
If you think you have enough knowledge and insight to criticize me, criticize my main point instead of trying to take things out of context to make your point. My main point was "There are tons of other qualified people who are as old as you and has as many children and wives as you, who are also tied with as many obligations as you. AND they ALL are willing to spend that 3 months in the bay area. Why would an investor choose someone who's NOT willing to do that over someone who is?"
I was criticizing your beliefs that moving to the bay area for 3 months is "taking risks".
Taking risks is building a COMPANY while having obligations such as a family, and mortgage.
I could be building the next most profitable company in the world for all you know. The bay area isn't the be all end all for internet based companies. It's foolish to require that they be there. That's like requiring your staff to be in-house when you run a software company.
I will tell you this right now, my obligations mean I can't leave my small town in Iowa. I don't care if you write a check for $10M on the spot for me to move to the bay area. My family is worth more than anybody can ever offer me.
Btw, I didn't down-vote you I think it's a valid question.
To your point:
>> The reality is that there are tons of other people who are as qualified as this person
I think this is where industry veteran may have an edge compared to "other qualified people" as you put it. Yes 20 years old founders are great for many reasons, but experienced veteran that know the system inside-out may have competitive advantages and know-how that younger ones don't have. And if that's right, I think it would be silly for YC to not invest in them because they can't move for 3 months. Actually, some people just travel a lot during those three months (I.e. going to dinner and stuff), but still run their company in their city. Keep in mind that not all companies in YC are two guys in a garage.. some of them have 50+ employees, you can't just leave for 3 months.
However as Sam said he doesn't feel they are underrepresented, and that they can use the fellowship which sounds great :)