It seems to me that the challenge is agnostic to your source of funding, and the actual complaint here is that the business world is not fair to bootstrappers.
Similarly, I can't compete in the NFL, but I don't accuse them of being unfair to small, scrawny dudes — I'm just not built to compete there, and I'm unwilling to accept the trade-offs in my life that would be necessary to have a chance.
My guess is: Bootstrappers are not the target audience, VC funded startups are.
So, yes it's unfair to bootstrappers, but that's life.
How a challenge gets crafted has a significant impact on it's outcome, and Amazon and the backers of the challenge probably have goals to identify companies that don't quite match your profile.
It would be awesome if they had a prize tailored towards companies like yours, but I don't think they are under any obligation to do so, and if it doesn't directly or indirectly meet their business goals, I wouldn't advise them to.
My company (gazaro.com) got accepted to the AWS Startup Challenge last year, and although we did have a small amount of funding (non-VC), we were essentially running a bootstrapped company at the time. We didn't win the "challenge". We were probably at a disadvantage from the start because we were against VC funded companies, but I think we did a very good job and I was generally happy with how the event went. Our only gripe with the event was the lack of media.
I'm unsure if Amazon changed their qualification threshold, but we certainly didn't have and VC funding when we participated in the contest last year.
"I couldn't help but wonder if the whole thing is an elitist outlet for VCs to gain publicity for their latest investments."
I would guess the top competitors in this competition are more interested in the free advertising/marketing opportunities than the cash/credit prizes. The prize isn't the money, it is Amazon's endorsement.
My business (LabSlice) was just announced as a semi-finalist. I didn't even realize it was publicly announced until I clicked this link in the poster's blog: http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2010/11/aws-start-up-challenge-20....
I am just a data point, but it's worth mentioning that LabSlice has no VC funding at all, and is truly a startup (ie. the website has only been online for a month or so). So on the one hand I can attest to some success, even without serious VC backing. On the other hand I will admit to surprise that the AWS competition classifies a startup as a business with less than $10M in revenues or $10M VC funding. Sure, they may technically be a startup, but they are in a much different league to the guy in the basement.
In some ways it would be pragmatic to have a VC funded tier and a non-VC funded tier. That's the only way to differentiate businesses to give a better chance to the little guy. But in reality this is a competition that Amazon funded out of their pocket and they can call whatever rules they see fit.
I'm not bitter. I never expected to win. I am surprised Amazon even puts on a contest with such lavish prizes.
AWS is a low cost way to start an app. They make bootstrapping possible. Therefore, I feel they are doing themselves a disservice by not representing these companies.
I merely wanted suggest a way to include small-timers like myself in this contest. And I did it by being honest about how I felt at the time. Would anyone have preferred otherwise?
BTW, since then I've been in touch with a great guy from AWS who thought my points were valid. Very cool and unnecessary of him. Maybe next year we'll see a "frugal" category. And maybe by then I'll have received funding and not be eligible :)
Anyway thanks everyone who weighed in. I urge all of you to check us out at www.takeoffvideo.com. You can reach me directly at stephenp@.
The world does not owe you a 'best effort' ribbon.
Related startup story.
I just spent two days in a long email conversation with Amazon.
I signed up for AWS 4 days before they started their freebie special, so once I realized this, I begged and pleaded with them to help my startup by grandfathering me in and letting me take advantage of the promotion.
All I got was form letters and BS.
I could have used another Amazon account, but I'm not going to cheat. I love the AWS stack, but as far as I'm concerned the folks at Amazon may be keen on PR, but they're no friends of startups, neither bootstrapped or otherwise, no matter how many contests they run. I also feel like the AWS guys are a completely different bunch than the rest of Amazon, who seem to care about their customers a lot more. And while I love the stack, I'm not impressed with the customer service at all. 99% of retailers will grandfather customers into a promotion if they ordered within a few days of the promotion starting.
Assholes.
There. That bit of venting made me feel better. :)
Hope it had the same effect on the OP.
The point being that sometimes venting and sour grapes serve a useful purpose.
I feel for the guy, entrepreneurs are a competitive bunch and losing is never easy to take, particularly when it can be interpreted as a shot against your startup's idea. That said, this comes off as nearly unadulterated sour grapes. Suggesting a second category with a smaller prize for bootstrapped or otherwise small startups is a fine idea. Taking it to the next level and saying that Amazon is being unfair by not doing so is a bit much.
Amazon is not a charity; they are indeed obligated to run any competitions in a way that maximizes AMZN shareholder value. This means spotlighting and helping out the startups that both use their services and have a high likelihood of success in the marketplace. It isn't surprising that many of the startups that have been validated by Amazon (by being selected for the semi-finals) have also been validated by venture capitalists. Should Amazon also provide laptops to all interested parties, so as not to exclude people without them?
It looks like several others have echoed the OP's sentiments on the Amazon announcement page, so maybe I'm off-base here. I just feel like everyone is better off not getting bent out of shape about winning contests; they should be seen as the lottery -- nice if you win them, no-op if you don't.