<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kjksf</author><text>You&apos;re assuming that you&apos;re more likely to be right than other investors.&lt;p&gt;There&apos;s an adjective for that kind of thinking, which I won&apos;t use because in context of hn it would be downvote suicide.&lt;p&gt;And yes, I know you&apos;re THE pg, but other investors, like Fred Wilson, John Doerr or Marc Andreessen are also THE investors.&lt;p&gt;The argument that I would find more persuasive would be that YC can help because it&apos;s willing to take more risks on &quot;out there&quot; ideas due to dramatically lower investment in any one startup and higher number of startups it funds.</text><parent_chain><item><author>pg</author><text>I can think of cases where startups have found no one to invest, and have ended up doing well.  This is where something like YC can help, actually; we can tell people candidly whether we think it&apos;s the investors who are wrong, or the startup.</text></item><item><author>photon_off</author><text>I think there&apos;s something to be said about knowing when to fold, and not to view these nobody-believed-in-us-but-we-overcame edge cases as motivation to play a losing hand.&lt;p&gt;There will always be false negatives, ideas that are rejected by angels but which later become enormously successful.  However, if the industry&apos;s finest angels are all passing, and you can literally find &lt;i&gt;nobody&lt;/i&gt; to invest, it is probably a wise decision to give up.  While angels are far from being 100% accurate in choosing what to invest in, overall they have to have &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; sense of what&apos;s a good idea in order to sustain themselves.  If they&apos;re all passing, better off hitting the drawing board.</text></item><item><author>olivercameron</author><text>I think a lot of startups put too much weight on what an investor thinks of their idea. Airbnb is a prime example of carrying on in the face of rejection, even if people are saying &quot;it&apos;s a stupid idea&quot;. I know a lot of founders who, after being told by many of the Valley&apos;s finest angels that their idea is no good, would just give up.&lt;p&gt;It just goes to show that you can create a $1 billion company, even if no one really gets it in the beginning, and in my eyes at least, they are actually justifying it (making a lot of money in a lot of different places).</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Airbnb Has Arrived: Raising Mega-Round at a $1 Billion+ Valuation</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/30/airbnb-has-arrived-raising-mega-round-at-a-1-billion-valuation/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>spicyj</author><text>Why are you more likely to be able to accurately judge a startup than other potential investors?</text><parent_chain><item><author>pg</author><text>I can think of cases where startups have found no one to invest, and have ended up doing well.  This is where something like YC can help, actually; we can tell people candidly whether we think it&apos;s the investors who are wrong, or the startup.</text></item><item><author>photon_off</author><text>I think there&apos;s something to be said about knowing when to fold, and not to view these nobody-believed-in-us-but-we-overcame edge cases as motivation to play a losing hand.&lt;p&gt;There will always be false negatives, ideas that are rejected by angels but which later become enormously successful.  However, if the industry&apos;s finest angels are all passing, and you can literally find &lt;i&gt;nobody&lt;/i&gt; to invest, it is probably a wise decision to give up.  While angels are far from being 100% accurate in choosing what to invest in, overall they have to have &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; sense of what&apos;s a good idea in order to sustain themselves.  If they&apos;re all passing, better off hitting the drawing board.</text></item><item><author>olivercameron</author><text>I think a lot of startups put too much weight on what an investor thinks of their idea. Airbnb is a prime example of carrying on in the face of rejection, even if people are saying &quot;it&apos;s a stupid idea&quot;. I know a lot of founders who, after being told by many of the Valley&apos;s finest angels that their idea is no good, would just give up.&lt;p&gt;It just goes to show that you can create a $1 billion company, even if no one really gets it in the beginning, and in my eyes at least, they are actually justifying it (making a lot of money in a lot of different places).</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Airbnb Has Arrived: Raising Mega-Round at a $1 Billion+ Valuation</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/30/airbnb-has-arrived-raising-mega-round-at-a-1-billion-valuation/</url></story>