That was my knee-jerk reaction to it too, but I re-read it more carefully and paid attention to the parts that specifically say that that's not what they're looking for. e.g.:
> I'm not saying that the big winners are all that matters, just that they're all that matters financially for investors. Since we're not doing YC mainly for financial reasons, the big winners aren't all that matters to us.
Also,
> If we ever got to the point where 100% of the startups we funded were able to raise money after Demo Day, it would almost certainly mean we were being too conservative.
(and the entire rest of that section talking about how they can afford to take huge risks, and should be.)
On the whole, this piece sounds like some observations and thoughts from pg, and nothing more. I think founders shouldn't try to read too much into it, specifically whether or not YC would be interested in their business.
YC might choose to fund you just because they like you.
> I'm not saying that the big winners are all that matters, just that they're all that matters financially for investors. Since we're not doing YC mainly for financial reasons, the big winners aren't all that matters to us.
Also,
> If we ever got to the point where 100% of the startups we funded were able to raise money after Demo Day, it would almost certainly mean we were being too conservative.
(and the entire rest of that section talking about how they can afford to take huge risks, and should be.)
On the whole, this piece sounds like some observations and thoughts from pg, and nothing more. I think founders shouldn't try to read too much into it, specifically whether or not YC would be interested in their business.
YC might choose to fund you just because they like you.