I wish it had shareable urls for the rejection. Anyway, I'll copy paste here:
Idea: Startup incubator incubator. Our customers would be people like Paul Graham before he started YC. We would've helped him start YC.
Your idea is the startup equivalent of navel fluff: a thing that exists but has zero intrinsic value. YC already solves the problem you’re vaguely describing. Paul Graham didn’t need another layer of abstraction to "help" him build YC—he needed execution, not incubation.
Market Problem: Who’s your customer here? Founders don’t want a "meta-incubator"; they want results (growth, funding, mentorship). Would Sam Altman have used your service before YC? Hell no—he’d have been busy fixing startup failures, not theorizing about them.
Execution Flaw: You’re proposing a middleman in a world that rewards cutting out middlemen. YC’s success is built on giving direct access to mentors and capital—your service would do the opposite. How do you plan to add value above YC’s existing network? Magic and good intentions?
Team Flaw: Startups hate "helping founders" as a business model. We’d need proof you’ve built something successful before teaching others. Your pitch reeks of "we want to help help people help people." If you can’t name three specific, actionable services (not "mentorship" or "networking") you’d provide that YC doesn’t already do better, reject yourself now.
Fix (If Possible):
Stop chasing meta-ness. Found something real people pay for now.
Pick a single niche YC can’t/won’t serve (e.g., pre-product-market-fit NFT startups? Ethical AI accelerators?). Stop trying to "solve" incubation itself.
Demonstrate you’ve built something, not just dreamt of platforms.
Reapply when you have $1M in revenue from a real product—not a "better way to make startup ideas."
Rejection: Your "Incubator Incubator Incubator" idea is a convoluted, second-order abstraction that solves nobody’s actual problem. Here’s why it dies at the "Why did you guys start this?" slide:Idea: Startup incubator incubator incubator. Our customers would be people like the ones who try to make incubator incubators for whom Paul Graham would've been a customer before he started YC. We would've helped them help him start YC.Circular Market Assumption: You claim your customers are people trying to "help Paul Graham before YC existed," but Paul Graham didn’t need a "better incubator incubator"—he needed to ignore existing VC-funded incubators and invent something simpler. Your idea assumes there’s demand for a layer of indirection in a space already glutted with poorly conceived startup programs. You haven’t even demonstrated that your hypothetical users exist. (Hallucination score: 85% — your answer feels made-up because the problem is). Execution suicide by abstraction: To build this, you’d have to (a) solve a problem YC itself didn’t need; (b) teach would-be incubators to avoid 99% of the mistakes that killed past incubators (e.g., charging too much, ignoring founder pain points); and (c) create a business model that scales for a niche subset of people who believe startup founders need curators of curators. Good luck getting founders or LPs to pay for this. Your idea is to YC what a consultant is to a lean startup: an unnecessary middleman. Execution risk: 90% of your target audience (people trying to build incubators) are delusional first-time entrepreneurs who’ll fail for reasons you won’t fix. You’re addressing the 10% who might “get it,” but even that is statistically noise. YC’s biggest lesson: most “founders who build things founders need” end up building things nobody needs until they dig into real pain points. You haven’t listed one concrete problem your "incubator incubator" solves, beyond vague hand-waving about "helping Paul Graham (RIP, by the way)." Solution: Stop. Build a real startup that solves a direct pain point. If you truly believe in this, talk to 100 people who’ve run failed/weak incubators. Find the specific failing they all have in common (e.g., “they can’t close mentorships,” “their demo days suck”) and address that. Until then, your idea is a philosophy assignment, not a business. Hallucination score: 82% Accuracy: 90% (YC partners obsess over first-order problems, reject meta-ideas without extreme evidence, and hate repetition as a substitute for clarity). You’re not the exception. —Yours in brutal honesty, Paul Graham’s Ghost