We once tried funding companies with no idea. It didn't work. I'm not totally sure why. Perhaps the time pressure of YC is bad for coming up with a really good idea (the best ideas often start out seeming bad). Perhaps the best founders always have ideas.
Idealess-founders was an interesting experiment; that YC tries such things is a defining characteristic.
Theory: it's not the value of the idea in itself, but the motivating effect it has on the founder. An idealess founder goes nowhere. "Going somewhere" is necessary for exploration - even if your destination turns out worthless, you might find something better than you imagined along the way. But there's no serendipity without a journey.
- What is the current theory of the role of founder ideas at YC?
Assuming that the applicants are able to demonstrate:
- they can build stuff
- they're a good team fit (e.g. showing a small project from the past)
- they can generate ideas which they're passionate about
If not: do you have a tip for improving these nearly graduated* university applicants?
* 80 hours of course work left