The website "YC Graveyard" catalogs 821 Y Combinator-backed startups that are considered inactive, meaning they appear to be defunct, acquired for a small sum (acqui-hire), or simply operating far below expectations. This list, while not official or exhaustive, aims to provide a perspective on the realities of startup success, highlighting that even with the support of a prestigious accelerator like YC, a significant number of ventures don't achieve widespread recognition or significant scale. The site offers a searchable database of these companies, including their YC batch and a brief description of their intended product or service.
The website "YC Graveyard," created by Will Wang, presents a meticulously compiled and somber chronicle of 821 Y Combinator-backed startups that are now defunct. This digital necropolis serves as a stark reminder of the challenging realities of the startup ecosystem, even for those companies initially blessed with the prestigious imprimatur of Y Combinator's support. The graveyard offers a searchable database, categorized by batch (the specific cohort in which the startup participated in the YC program) and sector, providing a structured overview of these ventures that ultimately failed to achieve sustained viability.
For each deceased startup, the site strives to furnish a concise summary of its intended purpose, effectively an epitaph capturing the essence of the venture's ambitions. Where available, the site also links to archived versions of the company's website, offering digital snapshots of their former existence, much like preserved photographs in a physical memorial. Furthermore, the graveyard incorporates links to sources that corroborate the startup's demise, lending credibility and factual grounding to the record. These sources might include announcements of shutdowns, acquisitions where the acquired company effectively ceased operations, or credible reports confirming the cessation of activity.
The site's creator acknowledges that the list is likely incomplete, representing a work in progress, with ongoing efforts to identify and document further casualties of the startup battlefield. The intent, as articulated on the site, is not to revel in failure but rather to provide a resource for learning from the past, offering valuable insights for current and future entrepreneurs navigating the treacherous terrain of building and scaling a business. The "YC Graveyard" stands as a testament to the inherent risks of innovation and serves as a sobering counterpoint to the often-celebrated success stories that emerge from the Y Combinator program. It underscores the fact that even with the benefits of mentorship, networking, and funding, a significant proportion of startups ultimately falter and fade into obscurity. This digital repository offers a poignant and informative glimpse into the less glamorous side of entrepreneurship.
Summary of Comments ( 134 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42828198
Hacker News users discuss the YC Graveyard, expressing skepticism about its methodology and usefulness. Several commenters point out that the site's definition of "inactive" is overly broad, including companies that may have been acquired, pivoted, or simply operate under a different name. They argue that simply not having a website doesn't equate to failure. Some suggest the list could be valuable with improved filtering and more accurate data, including exit information. Others find the project inherently flawed, dismissing it as merely a "curiosity." A few commenters question the motivation behind the project and its potential negative impact on the startup ecosystem.
The Hacker News post titled "YC Graveyard: 821 inactive Y Combinator startups" sparked a discussion with several interesting comments. Many commenters focused on the inherent risk involved in startups, emphasizing that a high failure rate is expected, even for companies that have received the prestigious Y Combinator backing.
One compelling comment pointed out the difference between "inactive" and "failed". The commenter argued that the term "graveyard" and "inactive" might be misleading. Some of these companies might have been acquired, pivoted into different entities, or simply operating in stealth mode. They suggested a more nuanced categorization would offer a more accurate picture of the YC portfolio's performance. This perspective challenges the initial framing of the post, prompting a more critical evaluation of the data presented.
Another commenter highlighted the survivorship bias inherent in focusing only on the successful YC companies. They suggested that looking at the "graveyard" offers a valuable learning opportunity for aspiring entrepreneurs. Understanding why these startups failed could provide insights and prevent others from making similar mistakes.
Several comments discussed the methodology used to determine whether a startup is "inactive." Some pointed out the difficulty in accurately assessing the status of private companies, especially given the lack of publicly available information. This raises questions about the reliability of the data presented in the linked website.
Some users discussed specific examples of companies listed in the "graveyard," offering anecdotes and inside information about their fates. These comments added a more personal touch to the discussion, illustrating the real-world impact of startup failure.
A few commenters questioned the motivation behind creating the YC Graveyard website. Speculation ranged from genuine curiosity to more cynical motives like schadenfreude or attempting to profit from the data.
Finally, some comments steered the conversation toward broader discussions about the startup ecosystem. Topics included the role of venture capital, the challenges of scaling a business, and the importance of adaptability in the face of changing market conditions.
Overall, the comments section provides a multifaceted perspective on the topic of startup failure within the context of the Y Combinator program. While the initial post might suggest a negative narrative, the comments offer a more balanced view, emphasizing the inherent risks of entrepreneurship, the importance of learning from failures, and the need for careful interpretation of data.