Y Combinator is not for the little guy anymore. (Or never been?)

[anon777]

@ejohnson Also describing surgery like a game seems like a recipe for disaster should something go wrong

 

[nikamelodia]

@anon777 Unless if it’s a simulator for practicing surgery, that’d be cool

 

[suzy999]

@ejohnson CEO/co-founder of Andromeda here. Nintendo was a pioneer in game console development when they opened up the NES to third-party licensing in 1986. Similarly, our goal is to build an AI-enabled surgical robot that others can build on. Medical hardware is really expensive and time-consuming to build. Other companies (or possibly even innovative surgeons) will be able to build devices and procedures on our robot and SW interface, simplifying development and reducing operator error.

BTW since OP asked, my top 3 reasons to do YC a second time:

1) Raise our next funding round faster, at better terms, from better investors

2) Recruiting - YC makes your company more appealing to lots of potential hires

3) It's an inspiring setting to start a new company and is a great forcing function to make you move even faster

 

[ejohnson]

@suzy999 I would definitely change the metaphor, nobody associates Nintendo with building a platform others can use currently.

 

[suzy999]

@ejohnson It’s a fair point. We use “App Store for surgery” sometimes.

 

[ejohnson]

@suzy999 That makes.... more sense I guess? You're still building a hardware device though and that only implies the software level to me. But maybe it's intuitive for others.

 

[tomorrow]

@zedrick “Winners focus on winning, losers focus on winners” - the phrase just stuck with me from the moment I first read it.

Folks, YC is a bunch of absolutely lovely people both in the firm and in the community, but it is still a business! It’s an investment firm not a venture philanthropy organisation. Supply/demand still applies. Scarcity of resources still apply.

If one of the founders is an experienced entrepreneur with an exit - they have one unique advantage over new pre-product / pre-experience teams complaining on not succeeding at first trial. They know how to suck at things and move forward. Because you will suck. A lot. A lot more if you think you won’t. And overcoming this sooner than running out of money is the major difference between you and that guy/gal with 300M+ exit.

There’s nothing personal about not getting in. Nada. So learn to be comfortable with small hiccups and failures and focus on the goal.

Getting disappointed for not receiving a check and not getting into the most competitive startup pigeon contest on the planet is not very productive. Use the disappointment to build a great company and prove everyone wrong by succeeding. Or prove them right by falling into self-indulging complaining & depression pit.

Check out Bessemer’s anti-portfolio for inspirational stories of how even experienced investors can get it wrong big time. Strive to be one of those stories, and reapply when you are. Or don't. Success stories read less boring when they are built on hardship & defiance of the disbelief.

Cheers