The previous firm policy of not making follow-on investments had two interesting side effects: signalling risk, and the nature of the relationship with the founders.
You've addressed signalling risk in another response, but I'm curious to hear your thinking about the impact this will have on your ability to have an authentic advisory relationship with founders.
Do you have any concerns that this could make founders dial back their level of authenticity with you? I think there's tremendous value in having founders who are comfortable being completely transparent about the concerns they have.
In the back of founders minds, there could now be a small voice saying "Should I discuss possible future issue X with YC? If we haven't come up with a good answer to X, it could impact the next round. We'd be better off dealing with X after our series C rather than after our series B." But in not having the conversation, tremendous value is lost - good advice might turn it into a non-issue.
You've addressed signalling risk in another response, but I'm curious to hear your thinking about the impact this will have on your ability to have an authentic advisory relationship with founders.
Do you have any concerns that this could make founders dial back their level of authenticity with you? I think there's tremendous value in having founders who are comfortable being completely transparent about the concerns they have.
In the back of founders minds, there could now be a small voice saying "Should I discuss possible future issue X with YC? If we haven't come up with a good answer to X, it could impact the next round. We'd be better off dealing with X after our series C rather than after our series B." But in not having the conversation, tremendous value is lost - good advice might turn it into a non-issue.