Facto – Day 1: launched a waitlist for a billing automation SaaS for EU freelancers (1 signup, 0 lines of code)
I just launched a waitlist for Facto, a billing automation SaaS for French/EU freelancers. Here's everything after day 1.
---
The problem I'm solving
I talked to a lot of freelancers over the past few weeks. The same frustrations kept coming up:
- Chasing unpaid invoices is awkward and time-consuming
- Forgetting to invoice after delivering a project
- Never being sure if their invoices are legally compliant (French law has very specific requirements)
- No visibility on who paid, who's late, what their monthly revenue looks like
The existing tools (FreshBooks, Wave, etc.) are built for the US market. French freelancers deal with specific legal requirements — VAT mentions, sequential invoice numbers, late payment penalty clauses — that most tools handle poorly or not at all.
What I'm building
Facto automates the entire billing flow:
→ Generate a compliant PDF invoice in 90 seconds
→ Auto-send to the client
→ Automatic reminders at D+7, D+14, D+30
→ Online payment link included
→ Dashboard to track paid / pending / overdue
Built for EU freelancers. EUR native. French legal mentions auto-filled.
The stack
Next.js + Supabase + Stripe Billing + Vercel
Day 1 numbers (honest)
- Waitlist signups: 1
- Landing page visits from LinkedIn: 3
- LinkedIn impressions: 122
- Interviews conducted: 0 (starting this week)
- Lines of code written: 0 (still in validation phase)
- Budget spent: ~0€
Yes, 1 signup. Early days.
What's next
Weeks 1-2: reach 50 waitlist signups + conduct 10 freelancer interviews
Weeks 3-6: build the MVP in public
Weeks 7-12: first paying customers
In 3 months, either it works or I'll have learned why it doesn't.
The landing page → https://facto-landing-page.vercel.app
---
For those who've built in the invoicing/billing space: what's the one thing you wish you'd known before starting? And for freelancers reading this — does this resonate with your experience?
#buildinpublic #saas #indiehacker #freelance
Since you asked what I’d prioritize testing first, I’d test whether late/unpaid invoices are a buying trigger, not just a frustration.
I wouldn’t treat the 1 waitlist signup as demand yet, but I also wouldn’t ignore it. At this stage, I’d separate three signals:
1. Interest: “This sounds useful.”
2. Intent: “I have this problem and want a solution soon.”
3. Buyer demand: “I would spend money, time, data, or workflow change to solve it.”
For the signup and early interviews, I’d ask:
- What happened the last time an invoice was late or unpaid?
- What did they do next?
- What did it cost them in time, stress, or cash-flow uncertainty?
- What are they using today instead?
- Have they paid for anything similar before?
- What would make reminders, compliance support, or the dashboard worth switching workflow for?
If the answers are mostly “this would be nice,” I’d keep testing before building. If you hear urgency, current workarounds, and willingness to change workflow, then late-payment recovery is probably the sharper first wedge than general invoicing automation.
For many freelancers, creating the invoice is not the hardest part, the uncomfortable part is deciding when and how to follow up without damaging the client relationship.
During the interviews, are you planning to test different reminder timings and tones as well? It would be interesting to learn whether freelancers care more about legal compliance, reducing late payments, or simply saving time on the whole billing process.
I think the biggest risk here is not building the wrong product.
It's interviewing the right freelancers, hearing the same complaints, and still ending up validating the wrong buying reason.
A lot of invoicing tools end up solving several frustrations at once, but only one of them usually creates enough urgency for someone to switch or pay.
I wouldn't try to solve that loosely in the thread because the interviews, landing page, and MVP priorities should all reinforce the same decision.
If useful, share your email and I'll send the tighter validation path in a way that's actually usable instead of crowding the thread.
Thanks, that's a fair point — the "one buying reason" framing is something I want to nail down during the interviews.
My current hypothesis is that the urgency comes from late/unpaid invoices specifically (the cash flow pain), not the admin time-saving, which is more of a "nice to have." The reminders feature is what I'd bet creates enough pain to pay for. But that's exactly what I want the interviews to confirm or kill.
Happy to keep it in the thread — if you've got a sharper way to isolate that buying trigger, I'd genuinely find it useful here, and so would anyone else reading. What would you prioritize testing first?
Possibly, but I'd be careful making that call from the interviews alone.
The useful part isn't identifying a pain. It's deciding which pain should own the product.
I wouldn't make that decision casually in a thread because it affects the interviews, MVP, and positioning all at once.
If you'd like the tighter version, drop your email and I'll put it together properly.
Appreciate it, but I'd rather keep the discussion open here so others can benefit too. If you've got a specific angle to share, the thread's open — otherwise no worries, I'll figure it out through the interviews.
That's fair.
The reason I'm avoiding a specific angle isn't because I think there's only one answer.
It's because I think the decision itself is more important than any individual opinion on it.
Probably best not to derail your thread further though. Curious to see what the interviews reveal.