I disagree, I didn't put words in the author's mouth. I didn't chose the questions or the framing. I also disagree, it is out of line to suggest that. Startups existed before YC. YC does not hold a monopoly on determining or ensuring success. Their "rejection" letter alludes to this fact.
YC has a tremendous amount of experience and their intuition and insight I'm sure leads to better decisions regarding startups, but they're in no way infallible.
I suppose my main point is that there are plenty of good companies that are fund worthy that don't get into YC for various reasons. One of those reasons being that YC doesn't have the time or resources to take them in. The YC model has been successful but there is still an underserved market here and that is why others are popping up, not that there is a bubble necessarily as the author suggests. There's no reason why angels wouldn't "invest in companies that are not vetted by Y Combinator?".
Keep in mind that YC didn't exist when Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple were started. It's quite possible that the next wave of those companies will be part of YC or are already part of YC.
The point is, granted that YC will improve your chances of success, just like being on american idol will help make you a success, but most stars next year will not be from american idol or from YC.
YC has a tremendous amount of experience and their intuition and insight I'm sure leads to better decisions regarding startups, but they're in no way infallible.
I suppose my main point is that there are plenty of good companies that are fund worthy that don't get into YC for various reasons. One of those reasons being that YC doesn't have the time or resources to take them in. The YC model has been successful but there is still an underserved market here and that is why others are popping up, not that there is a bubble necessarily as the author suggests. There's no reason why angels wouldn't "invest in companies that are not vetted by Y Combinator?".