The Founder Institute – A Graduate’s Firsthand Account(roachblog.com)
roachblog.com
The Founder Institute – A Graduate’s Firsthand Account
http://roachblog.com/2010/03/17/the-founder-institute-a-graduates-firsthand-account/
6 comments
I did FI Bay Area Winter 2009 (but dropped out midway through because I had to go to the middle east for dayjob, and couldn't quit dayjob without seriously screwing over a coworker). I may do FI again (they let you go on to the next session if you drop out), and I would definitely suggest FI to anyone looking for that kind of program. Adeo is great, and many of the mentors are awesome.
As a direct comparison for launching a product, YC is better than FI because it's full-time vs. part time, but FI is great. However, getting into FI and going along for 2 months might make it more attractive to stay, having invested those 2 months. FI is also a little more about the business, YC is more about the product -- FI would actually be even better as a follow-on to a YC semester.
I would probably go ahead and do FI as a learning experience, then evaluate when YC responds to you whether you should drop out or not. (answer would probably be yes, but this is the first semester for FI Paris and it might be amazing)
If you wanted to actually relocate to the bay area, YC or FI Bay Area would probably be more valuable than FI Paris, since the mentors/angels in the Paris program are probably going to be European. That would be my biggest factor in deciding.
As a direct comparison for launching a product, YC is better than FI because it's full-time vs. part time, but FI is great. However, getting into FI and going along for 2 months might make it more attractive to stay, having invested those 2 months. FI is also a little more about the business, YC is more about the product -- FI would actually be even better as a follow-on to a YC semester.
I would probably go ahead and do FI as a learning experience, then evaluate when YC responds to you whether you should drop out or not. (answer would probably be yes, but this is the first semester for FI Paris and it might be amazing)
If you wanted to actually relocate to the bay area, YC or FI Bay Area would probably be more valuable than FI Paris, since the mentors/angels in the Paris program are probably going to be European. That would be my biggest factor in deciding.
My first question would be why you consider YC to be your best choice. No offense intended to the host of this forum, but there's a lot of reasons that might not be true. Clearly YC gets better press, but as with FI it's not for everyone. A lot depends on the stage of your idea/company.
My gut reaction to the underlying question is that you should focus on figuring out which program is better for your situation and devote yourself to it. Having been through the FI experience I personally find the idea of using it as a fallback or filler a bit insulting, but Institute doesn't make that distinction.
My gut reaction to the underlying question is that you should focus on figuring out which program is better for your situation and devote yourself to it. Having been through the FI experience I personally find the idea of using it as a fallback or filler a bit insulting, but Institute doesn't make that distinction.
Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. But as you said yourself, just because I think YC is a better choice for me does not mean it's true, and it's certainly does not mean it is true for everyone and YC > FI. So I'm not sure why you feel this way...
Thanks for your advices, I will consider both programs carefully. One of the aspects which make me prefer YC so far (as an European) is the "Silicon Valley adventure", I just don't want to miss this chance :) So again I'm not saying YC is better than FI, I was just wondering if it's worth the money if I don't go to the end of the program. And honestly I think it is, I just wanted to have some input to assess my decision.
Thanks for your advices, I will consider both programs carefully. One of the aspects which make me prefer YC so far (as an European) is the "Silicon Valley adventure", I just don't want to miss this chance :) So again I'm not saying YC is better than FI, I was just wondering if it's worth the money if I don't go to the end of the program. And honestly I think it is, I just wanted to have some input to assess my decision.
Not taking it personally, no worries. Just want to make sure the FI doesn't get disrespected. Realize I might not be in the right place for that though :)
I certainly don't understand YC as well as I do FI, but I would think a lot of it comes down to how far along you are with your company. FI might be more valuable if you're less advanced - have a great idea, maybe a prototype but not a ton else. YC is probably more suited for companies that are further along. YC grads can feel free to correct me on that.
Whichever you choose I'd make sure you really, fully, totally, unequivocally understand as much about the details of the program as you can. As others have mentioned here and elsewhere, there are bound to be surprises no matter which program you enter. The goal is to minimize the impact of those surprises.
I certainly don't understand YC as well as I do FI, but I would think a lot of it comes down to how far along you are with your company. FI might be more valuable if you're less advanced - have a great idea, maybe a prototype but not a ton else. YC is probably more suited for companies that are further along. YC grads can feel free to correct me on that.
Whichever you choose I'd make sure you really, fully, totally, unequivocally understand as much about the details of the program as you can. As others have mentioned here and elsewhere, there are bound to be surprises no matter which program you enter. The goal is to minimize the impact of those surprises.
YC is probably more suited for companies that are further along.
No; we've funded groups that had been launched for a year and others that didn't even have an idea yet. Our threshold is simply whether the founders are ready to work full time on the company.
No; we've funded groups that had been launched for a year and others that didn't even have an idea yet. Our threshold is simply whether the founders are ready to work full time on the company.
Thanks for the clarification pg.
I would think that it'd be pretty uncommon to be accepted at the pre-idea stage though, no? I mean, seed funding for literally nothing more than a good team is pretty tough to come by. For FI that's actually pretty common (at least in my experience).
I would think that it'd be pretty uncommon to be accepted at the pre-idea stage though, no? I mean, seed funding for literally nothing more than a good team is pretty tough to come by. For FI that's actually pretty common (at least in my experience).
It's quite common with us. A lot of the companies we fund do something different than they applied with.
I'm in the NY program, which is finishing up next week. I know a couple of others in the NY program lurk here as well. Feel free to hit me up if you have questions about Founder Institute.
My background going into the program was purely technology based. I had a very limited view of what it actually took to start a company. When the program started I was so busy with development that the time spent in sessions seemed like a much bigger sacrifice than the $800.00.
Looking back I can firmly say I was clueless. As a sole founder I was constantly busy, but I wasn't focusing on what mattered. I was working in a vacuum with blinders on. Through direct interaction with dozens of successful CEOs I was able to start to see the forest through the trees. I'm now focusing on 1) the business development and partnership creation that my company needs to get off the ground 2) customer development to ensure that what I have built is a product that user's will buy (better late than never). Coding is how I procrastinate.
Also, the mentors are very accessible and willing to help. When I had a question about how to handle an investor I was able to shoot a couple emails off and get advice in less than an hour. I'm meeting two of the SD mentors for lunch next week.
Finally, I think the long term value is camaraderie with fellow founders. It's a great feeling to know a dozen other people you can talk to that are solving the same problems as you. I came out of the program with at least half a dozen super-meaningful connections. You can't put a price tag on that.
Every rose has its thorns. The institute was invaluable for me but I'd definitely say its not for everyone. Any description of this program and who it's for should contain a very clear statement of one fact that was NOT made perfectly clear at the beginning:
You must incorporate as a C or S corp during the term or they will ask you to leave the program. The pressure to incorporate starts about half way through, leading up to the "Incorporation" session. About a third of the class dropped out at this point either because they weren't ready or because they objected on philosophical grounds. FI is taking steps to make this clearer to new applicants but since this post didn't mention it I thought I'd tack it on.
There is a new session starting up in San Diego pretty soon. If you're serious about starting a company then you should definitely consider it.
Looking back I can firmly say I was clueless. As a sole founder I was constantly busy, but I wasn't focusing on what mattered. I was working in a vacuum with blinders on. Through direct interaction with dozens of successful CEOs I was able to start to see the forest through the trees. I'm now focusing on 1) the business development and partnership creation that my company needs to get off the ground 2) customer development to ensure that what I have built is a product that user's will buy (better late than never). Coding is how I procrastinate.
Also, the mentors are very accessible and willing to help. When I had a question about how to handle an investor I was able to shoot a couple emails off and get advice in less than an hour. I'm meeting two of the SD mentors for lunch next week.
Finally, I think the long term value is camaraderie with fellow founders. It's a great feeling to know a dozen other people you can talk to that are solving the same problems as you. I came out of the program with at least half a dozen super-meaningful connections. You can't put a price tag on that.
Every rose has its thorns. The institute was invaluable for me but I'd definitely say its not for everyone. Any description of this program and who it's for should contain a very clear statement of one fact that was NOT made perfectly clear at the beginning:
You must incorporate as a C or S corp during the term or they will ask you to leave the program. The pressure to incorporate starts about half way through, leading up to the "Incorporation" session. About a third of the class dropped out at this point either because they weren't ready or because they objected on philosophical grounds. FI is taking steps to make this clearer to new applicants but since this post didn't mention it I thought I'd tack it on.
There is a new session starting up in San Diego pretty soon. If you're serious about starting a company then you should definitely consider it.
With regards to incorporation, I would only say the word "pressure" (at least in NY) might be too strong. They put it out there and make it clear - incorporate or clear out of the way. But in no way do they force you to do something you don't think you're ready for.
As for awolf's statement that it wasn't clear that it was a requirement, it's obviously meaningless to refute that subjectively. I will say that there's an entire section in the Founder's Guide (which you have access to once you're accepted) covering incorporation. The very first line is:
"Forming a company before the end of the semester and issuing the Bonus Pool Warrant is required to graduate."
Granted, that section might have been edited mid-year, but I remember understanding the point clearly before entering, mostly because I had an LLC and knew I'd have to convert it. It might suffer a bit from being right after the "Fundraising" section, which I'll assume most founders fast-forward to and reread over and over :)
As for awolf's statement that it wasn't clear that it was a requirement, it's obviously meaningless to refute that subjectively. I will say that there's an entire section in the Founder's Guide (which you have access to once you're accepted) covering incorporation. The very first line is:
"Forming a company before the end of the semester and issuing the Bonus Pool Warrant is required to graduate."
Granted, that section might have been edited mid-year, but I remember understanding the point clearly before entering, mostly because I had an LLC and knew I'd have to convert it. It might suffer a bit from being right after the "Fundraising" section, which I'll assume most founders fast-forward to and reread over and over :)
The main complaint many of my classmates had was that the guide said "before the end of the semester" yet we were told we needed to be incorporated one week after the Incorporation session (half way through) or we would have to step aside.
FI has been iterating their process as they go along. I'm glad to hear there wasn't confusion in the New York session.
FI has been iterating their process as they go along. I'm glad to hear there wasn't confusion in the New York session.
I hear you. I'm also glad to hear they're tweaking the formula. I think we can agree it's not only fair but important to set the incorporation requirement a little earlier in the session.
From the Institute's perspective, there are some (although not many) who saw the program as an easy means to gain access to mentors and investors for little or no commitment on their part. As such, they have no intention of graduating. Forcing them to decide sooner weeds them out.
From the founder's perspective, those not planning on graduating detract from the overall experience because they're not contributing positively. In some cases they're actually they're making it difficult for others. In NY I found the program started to become more relevant to me as the less-committed and less-advanced founders started dropping out.
From the Institute's perspective, there are some (although not many) who saw the program as an easy means to gain access to mentors and investors for little or no commitment on their part. As such, they have no intention of graduating. Forcing them to decide sooner weeds them out.
From the founder's perspective, those not planning on graduating detract from the overall experience because they're not contributing positively. In some cases they're actually they're making it difficult for others. In NY I found the program started to become more relevant to me as the less-committed and less-advanced founders started dropping out.
btw, my take on FI:
http://www.nodroidsallowed.com/2010/03/02/tips-for-those-app...
http://www.nodroidsallowed.com/2010/03/02/tips-for-those-app...
I did the Bay Area Winter 2009 program (although I dropped out halfway through for dayjob emergency; I may go back for Summer 2010).
FI is great for several reasons: 1) It focuses more on developing entrepreneurs, vs. necessarily companies. The requirement that you incorporate to graduate is kind of at odds with this, but definitely the curriculum for the first half of the program is compatible with coming up with an idea and launching it within the program. 2) It's compatible with having a day job during the program -- if you have good time management skills, you can keep the day job while attending FI, launching your company, and thus not have to worry about funding. This is a major differentiator vs. YC. 3) Some of the mentors (IMO Aaron Patzer, Jon Betts-Croix, Ram from A9, and some others) were fucking AMAZING. It's worth $600 just to see their sessions. 4) You have some chance of meeting great cofounders in the program -- I actually met a few people I'd be happy to work with, and have gone down the road to doing a startup with someone from the program.
For the ideal training to do a startup (other than JFDI), I'd do an entrepreneurship program in undergrad (e.g. MIT E-Club, 100k contest), then something like YC to build a product, and Founder Institute to learn about the nuts and bolts of running a company, possibly interspersed with time spent working at either startups or funded former-startups.
FI is great for several reasons: 1) It focuses more on developing entrepreneurs, vs. necessarily companies. The requirement that you incorporate to graduate is kind of at odds with this, but definitely the curriculum for the first half of the program is compatible with coming up with an idea and launching it within the program. 2) It's compatible with having a day job during the program -- if you have good time management skills, you can keep the day job while attending FI, launching your company, and thus not have to worry about funding. This is a major differentiator vs. YC. 3) Some of the mentors (IMO Aaron Patzer, Jon Betts-Croix, Ram from A9, and some others) were fucking AMAZING. It's worth $600 just to see their sessions. 4) You have some chance of meeting great cofounders in the program -- I actually met a few people I'd be happy to work with, and have gone down the road to doing a startup with someone from the program.
For the ideal training to do a startup (other than JFDI), I'd do an entrepreneurship program in undergrad (e.g. MIT E-Club, 100k contest), then something like YC to build a product, and Founder Institute to learn about the nuts and bolts of running a company, possibly interspersed with time spent working at either startups or funded former-startups.
As a Founder Institute 2009 inaugural graduate I share the same opinion as it was written here. With my strong technical background the training added most valuable information on how to build and run a start-up, which I thought I knew, but I had to learn that I actually missed a lot.
I agree that the course might not be for everyone depending on the business and strategy you try to establish. But anyone who intends to found a company and knows he needs to add on more knowledge in certain areas the training can help tremendously. You also gain a strong network.
But it does not come for free and the 4 months are a lot of work. Listening to these mentors and CEO’s and understanding the stories why they were so successful helps you to use this information and apply on your own. On top you can get short advice from the mentor’s which can be also highly valuable.
What I enjoy now most is the network of the other founders from our course. Founder Institute program was awesome.
I agree that the course might not be for everyone depending on the business and strategy you try to establish. But anyone who intends to found a company and knows he needs to add on more knowledge in certain areas the training can help tremendously. You also gain a strong network.
But it does not come for free and the 4 months are a lot of work. Listening to these mentors and CEO’s and understanding the stories why they were so successful helps you to use this information and apply on your own. On top you can get short advice from the mentor’s which can be also highly valuable.
What I enjoy now most is the network of the other founders from our course. Founder Institute program was awesome.
I could follow the FI program until May, however if (cross fingers) I'm accepted at YC I won't be able to follow the FI program until the end. I do have the 800$, do you think it's worth using it for at least 2 months at FI?