Does the IK12 and YC merger disadvantage edtech startups?
1 comments
Imagine K12 and YC have always used nearly identical criteria for whether we would fund companies. In this case, the rules have not changed, the outcomes have. They will be better, we think. We want the edtech companies we fund to have the greatest chance of success and that's why we've teamed up with YC.
But an IK12 application didn't open. Instead, IK12 folded into Y Combinator.
We had weighed the pros and cons of applying to YC (under the education RFS) vs IK12. We had concluded that the latter would better suit our needs/circumstances.
So we're scrambling a bit. Now, instead of being first out the gate, we're applying in the middle of an application cycle. We won't know anything about our status until mid-April (as opposed to three weeks, rolling basis). And we'll need to relocate to the Bay Area three months earlier. Etc.
I'm NOT complaining. Really. Adapt or die.
Plus, I love the idea of being amongst the YC set. But there's a lot I would have done differently if I had known I'd be applying to YC rather than IK12. I'd have spent more time on a prototype. I'd have applied earlier. I'd have been more active on HN the last few months.
With IK12's process, my roommate/co-founder could take a sabbatical (where he could go back to his teaching job, if needed); now, he's going to have to burn some bridges if we get accepted. Etc.
These are sacrifices we're willing to make. I know this surely sounds as though I'm just whining about how "the rules have changed". But what I'm more concerned about is if we'll get as fair a hearing as we would have with "the old" IK12.
At the end of the day, if our idea is good enough, it shouldn't really matter. But I can't help but wonder if we (not just myself, but the edtech set as whole, who would have applied to IK12) is going to be somewhat disadvataged, at least for this application cycle. I guess we'll find out.