Of course, ultimately it is TC's choice whom they cover. But I totally fail to see why just because it is a YC company, it is news-worthy. And as I said in another comment, I am not concerned that they covered Optimizely. All I mind (that too a little bit) is that they passed on us.

When TC, Mashable or RWW didn't reply I realized A/B testing may not be as sexy as location-based-gaming or a cool new iPhone app. But then covering an A/B testing startup on basis of YC while passing on another A/B testing startup (because it is not YC) is what I call "unfair". Right, I know it is not an ideal world, but someone has to keep reminding what a fair world could be :)

PS: Almost all your examples of news-maker point to the VC/Angel/Web clique and perhaps you are right that blogs that serve that clique may not be interested in a (bootstrapped) startup that doesn't fit the "culture".

Very classy response, it gives me great confidence that you will go very far with your company in spite of silly things like this.

It definitely isn't fair, but media coverage is transient, long term what matters is business savvy, customer satisfaction and technology.

No two bit article featuring a 'me too' competitor, funded or not is going to make a difference there in the longer term.

I don't understand why "fair" is part of the conversation... Are you suggesting that they should make coverage a pure product meritocracy rather than based on the metrics that drive their business? Certainly product quality impacts the decision, but it's not unfair for them to run their business like a business.

For whatever reason, Y Combinator has engaged enough people to have a kind of 'following' that seems to be like other start-up investment groups. It may be due to PG's writing or it may be because we're all part of the community here, but people here WANT to see Y Combinator start-ups do well.

So it makes sense then that TechCrunch would cover every single YC launch, because this site is going to drive a boat load of traffic their way.

If it makes you feel better, people who read hacker news shouldn't be your target group anyways. The 'winner' in this market will be the people who engages webmasters who are inexperienced and wouldn't have heard of A/B testing before landing on your page.

> people here WANT to see Y Combinator start-ups do well.

Sure, but being here and not being Y combinator funded should not translate in to a disadvantage either. After all, bootstrapping is a lot harder than getting VC money and some names behind you for equity, once your idea is out in the open the least you could ask for is a level playing field in terms of coverage. It's not like a posting about other start-ups would cost TC traffic.

In this case it almost seems like they delayed mentioning paraschopras offering until the YC combinator venture went live.

Whatever happened to rooting for the underdog? I mean a two-person company making it in India with Google as their competitor is as good a story as anything else. You are being unfair.

I'd say it makes for an even better story just because of that.

That's what I meant also, just my English is twisted sometimes :)

I meant "as good as anything else" in the sense of "better or at least equal to any other story"

What?! I never said who I was rooting for. This is business (for techcrunch). The world of software is not a product meritocracy. Again, I love the product, but Paras has failed to craft a story that will drive page views,retweets, and comments. He can solve that with storytelling, a celebrity investor, or some other strategy.

I agree that the david and goliath story has potential. He should play that up.

No, I didn't mean that you were not rooting for him, but that you implied his story was not interesting for bloggers. I said the "david and goliath" aspect of the story was interesting and news-worthy.

Reading the TC story, and this discussion, the gapingvoid cartoonists' line comes to mind: "Meeting a person who wrote a masterpiece on the back of a deli menu would not surprise me. Meeting a person who wrote a masterpiece with a silver Cartier fountain pen on an antique writing table in an airy SoHo loft would SERIOUSLY surprise me."

Yeah, I agree with you-- I think you're missing my point. The David and Goliath angle is EXACTLY what he should pursue. He's not. PR is about handing GREAT STORIES to bloggers/reporters. Stuff that is gift-wrapped. That's storytelling, and it's something Paras either isn't good at or isn't throwing effort into.

My point is that the story isn't in the facts, it's in the storytelling. You can call it a juicy steak or a muscle tissue sample of a castrated bull and it's the same damn thing. If you want to catch the eye of key bloggers, you can't make them dig through facts for a great story. They won't take the time to do it.