Perhaps for that reason, the startup incubator has sweetened the deal for its latest group of founders, raising the standard investment from $125,000 to $500,000. This amount is more than double what other accelerator programs typically offer and surpasses the usual angel investment for most pre-seed startups.
“No other accelerator can match that investment package,” claims Randall Stross, the author of The Launch Pad, who documented the incubator’s summer 2011 cohort, which featured companies like Genius and Caviar. “And no one else can come close to matching its impressive roster of successful alumni.”
The alumni network is, of course, the reason the incubator is able to provide such substantial funding: its investments have performed exceptionally well over the past decade, creating a substantial capital pool for future entrepreneurs. “Your prior successes allow you to make generous bets on every startup,” remarks Stross. The organization’s current aim is to expand its connections even further, betting on as many startups as possible to identify the next billion-dollar firms within its network.
In practice, this means the incubator has seen considerable growth. During Stross’s immersion in 2011, there were 64 startups in the batch. By 2018, that number increased to 141 startups. In 2022, the figure surged to 414. Although the most recent cohort has decreased to 250 startups, it remains twice as large as those in prior years and approximately ten times the size of the 2008 class.
The organization has cited its expanding cohorts as evidence of its growth, even while investors have expressed concerns over the challenges posed by watching hundreds of companies pitch during multiple Demo Days, with founders noting potential brand dilution. “For the founders, I would think it is much less enjoyable to be one of 220 startups than one of 64,” Stross observes. With larger cohorts, it’s simply more challenging to stand out.
However, for the current leadership, the increased numbers symbolize the thriving success of the community. They believe the incubator experience revolves around bringing people together and allowing the network to flourish.
This may signify a return to in-person events in San Francisco for future cohorts. “There is no replacement for being in person,” states the leadership team. While the previous approach of relocating startups to San Francisco may seem outdated, particularly as investors from Silicon Valley increasingly look beyond the U.S., fostering regular interactions among participants remains a key part of their plan. “Do you need to be in a particular place for 12 weeks? Maybe not,” they suggest. “But the most successful teams regularly convene.”
Bringing founders together in San Francisco again could bolster the incubator’s network value. Tom Eisenmann, an entrepreneurship professor at Harvard Business School, indicates that the mentoring and investor access provided by the organization make it an invaluable resource for startups, surpassing even the $500,000 investment. Similar to Harvard, it serves as a gateway to numerous opportunities after graduation.
This dynamic has led some founders to charge the incubator with operating like “Silicon Valley mob bosses,” asserting that they use their influence to hinder competitors. Leadership disputes this characterization. However, as they take on the role of president, they appear to be conveying to the next group of founders that if such a powerful startup network exists, it is far more beneficial to be part of it than to remain an outsider.