Do founders actually research market gaps before building?
I keep noticing the same pattern:
People spend money in a market, but still complain that existing solutions don’t really work.
A few examples:
- Anxiety apps: people pay, but say the advice feels generic and they stop using it.
- Sleep apps: people pay, but say they get data without clear action.
- YouTube tools: people pay, but still don’t know what to make next.
- Hair loss products: people pay, but still don’t know what actually works for their case.
The pattern seems to be:
- People already pay
- Existing solutions still disappoint them
- The desired outcome is clear
- There may be a gap for a better product
I’m thinking about turning this into short “market gap reports” for indie hackers and AI builders.
Each report would answer:
- What are people already paying for?
- Why are they still unhappy?
- What outcome do they actually want?
- What product gaps might exist?
Would this be useful before building a product?
Or is this one of those things founders say they want, but wouldn’t actually pay attention to?
Trending on Indie Hackers
In my opinion, the greatest blunder that entrepreneurs commit is thinking that just because there is a gap in the market, there is an opportunity for a business venture. The gap can be of little significance if no one cares enough to look for a different solution. From my experience, it becomes quite clear from customer interviews as to whether the complaint is genuine enough to switch.
That’s a really valuable point. Thank you.
I hadn’t been thinking enough about switching intent. It’s easy to find complaints, but much harder to know whether people care enough to actually change behavior or try another solution.
A gap is not the same as a business opportunity — that distinction helps a lot.
One thing I’m still unsure about: for early web/app ideas, customer interviews can be hard to get before you have users or an audience.
How would you test whether the complaint is strong enough to build for in that situation?
I think the important signal isn’t just that people complain while paying—it’s that they keep paying despite the disappointment. That usually means the job-to-be-done is real, but the current solutions are only partially solving it. The gap worth building for is often not “no solution exists,” but “no solution closes the loop from insight → action.”
Thanks for the comment.
I really like the distinction between “people complain” and “people keep paying despite the disappointment.” That feels like a much stronger signal.
I’ve noticed this a lot when looking at different businesses. People often know that the existing solutions are not perfect, but they still pay because the problem matters enough.
So maybe the real opportunity is not always that “no solution exists,” but that existing solutions don’t fully close the loop from insight to action.
That’s why I’ve been looking into markets where people already spend money, but still remain disappointed. I’m trying to understand what product opportunities might exist inside those gaps.
Appreciate the perspective.
Glad it resonated.
One thing your reply made me think about is that there's a strategic decision underneath that approach which isn't really about finding opportunities—it's about deciding what counts as sufficient evidence that a gap is worth building for.
I have a couple of thoughts on that, but I don't think I can explain the reasoning properly in a thread.
If you're interested, what's the best email to reach you on?
Thanks — that sounds very relevant to what I’m trying to figure out.
I’d be happy to hear your thoughts.
You can reach me at: [email protected]