How did you know your idea was actually worth building?
I’ve been thinking a lot about validation lately.
Not fake validation (friends saying “cool idea”).
Not vanity metrics.
Not a few signups.
But real validation, the kind that signals someone has a painful enough problem to pay.
For those who’ve validated something successfully:
What was the moment you knew it was real?
And for those still in idea stage, what are you using as your signal?
Genuinely curious how others here think about this.
For me the signal isn’t just “will they pay?” — it’s how they behave before paying.
Real validation shows up when someone changes their workflow, introduces you to others unprompted, or keeps chasing you for the solution.
Money is the cleanest signal, but urgency and behaviour change usually show up first I think.
That’s a great distinction.
I like the behavior lens especially the “do they change their workflow?” test. That’s a much harder signal to fake than someone casually saying they’d pay.
Totally agree that money is the cleanest signal, but urgency usually shows up in behavior first.
Out of curiosity, what’s been the strongest early signal you’ve personally seen before someone pays?
With my service, the strongest early signal I’ve seen is simple: they don’t wait for me.
The serious ones test something we’ve discussed straight away - they make the uncomfortable decision, cut the distraction, have the hard internal conversation, or send back numbers after trying a change.
They have agency, and it shows up before payment does.
The people who stay in discussion mode rarely move. The ones who move usually end up working with me.
That makes a lot of sense, agency really is the strongest early signal.
It’s interesting how often the people who “move first” are the ones who actually get results. Just talking or planning doesn’t cut it; action speaks louder than words.
Have you noticed any patterns in why some people act quickly while others stay in discussion mode?
I think the strongest validation signal is when someone not only says they want the product, but is willing to change their current behavior to use it. That could be paying for it, but even earlier signals like someone asking for access, requesting features, or trying to use an unfinished version can be meaningful.
Something I’ve noticed is that real validation often shows up as friction — people asking if they can get in earlier, asking when something will launch, or trying to solve the problem with workarounds until a solution exists. That’s usually a sign the problem is actually painful enough to matter.
Curious if others here have seen a similar pattern where user behavior mattered more than metrics early on
This is a great way to frame it.
Behavior change is probably the clearest signal you can get early on. People saying “this is cool” is easy people actually adjusting how they work is a completely different level.
The point about friction is interesting too, because most people try to remove friction too early, when sometimes it’s actually a sign of demand (people pushing to get access, hacking together workarounds, etc.).
One pattern I’ve noticed is:
weak problems → polite interest
real problems → impatient behavior
If people are waiting, following up, or trying to use a half-baked version, that’s usually a much stronger signal than any metric dashboard early on.
Have you ever had a case where the signals looked good on paper, but behavior didn’t really match?
Good question. Yes, there was a clear difference.
Leading with data ('industry data shows 5-9% of subscription charges fail monthly') tended to get a polite acknowledgment — 'yeah that's a known problem.' It closed the conversation rather than opening it.
Starting with the experience question first — 'do you ever see payments fail in Stripe, and what do you do about it?' — got much richer responses. People would pause and say things like 'actually we had a situation last quarter where we lost three customers because nobody caught the failed payments in time.' Those stories were gold.
I ended up using data as a follow-up to confirm, not as an opener. The sequence that worked: ask about their experience → listen for a concrete story → then share the industry number as validation of what they just described rather than the lead.
The honest summary: data alone builds a case, a story makes someone feel something. Both matter, but in different order than I expected.
This is such a strong distinction.
Data tends to inform, but stories make people relive the problem. And when they’re back in that moment, the urgency becomes real again.
What you said about sequencing is key too leading with data can feel abstract, but once someone shares a concrete experience, the data almost acts as “proof” that it’s not just a one-off.
I’ve seen a similar pattern where:
data gets agreement
stories get action
And for early-stage validation, action is really the only thing that matters.
Out of curiosity, once you got those stories, did they noticeably change how you positioned or framed your solution?
This comment was deleted 6 months ago
For our current product, validation came from data + direct conversations — neither alone would have been enough.
Data first: found multiple industry studies showing 5-10% of expected MRR is silently lost each month to failed subscription payments. Exists for every SaaS after about month 3, almost nobody has an automated solution for it.
Then conversations: reached out to 5 SaaS founders on IH and asked if this had bitten them. 3 of 5 had a specific story — not 'yeah sounds like a problem' but 'this happened last month, we only found out when the customer emailed angry.' The other 2 said 'we handle it manually, it is on my list to automate.'
The specific moment: someone I had never spoken to said 'I would have paid for this last month.' That was the signal.
General signal I keep coming back to: when someone unprompted shares a specific recent story about the pain — not a polite 'that sounds useful' but a specific thing that cost them last quarter. That is real validation.
That’s such a strong approach, combining data and real conversations really nails it.
I love your “specific story” insight. Polite agreement doesn’t mean anything, but when someone recounts a concrete recent pain point, that’s when you know it’s real.
Out of curiosity, did you notice any difference in how founders responded when you approached them with data first versus just asking about their experience?
You have well pointed out that your friends' opinion is not a true validation. You need to talk to your target audience. AI tools make it easy to create a specific prototype and test real functionality, rather than just pitching an idea.
Exactly, friends and peers can be encouraging, but their feedback rarely reflects real world use.
Testing a functional prototype with your target audience is where the real signals show up. It’s amazing how quickly assumptions get challenged once people are interacting with something tangible rather than just hearing your pitch.
Have you found any particular methods or tools especially useful for getting that early hands on feedback?
First of all, it's easier to get feedback with a prototype. AI is a good tool here. Secondly, you should run quick usability tests and collect behavioral metrics such as the task success rate, time to complete task, misclicks, etc. Behavior tells more than words.
That’s a solid approach especially the focus on behavior over just verbal feedback.
A lot of people stop at “what did you think?” but metrics like task success rate or where people hesitate usually tell the real story.
One thing I’ve noticed too is that even with good usability signals, sometimes people can complete the task but still not really feel the need for the product long term.
So it becomes a mix of:
can they use it easily and do they actually care enough to come back
Have you been tracking anything around repeat usage or intent after the first interaction?
I'm at this exact stage as well. "The proof is in the pudding" as they say and I generally find this to be true. If enough people point to the same problem unprompted, there might be value in offering a solution.
Unprompted signals are usually the clearest indicator of real demand.
If you’re trying to figure out whether a solution would really land, sometimes it helps to step back and map out the specific pain points and early signals you’ve seen. I actually help founders do exactly that turning those “unprompted signals” into a clearer plan for their product or service.
Curious, what’s the pattern you’re seeing most often right now in your audience?
I knew when I searched Reddit for people complaining about the problem. Found hundreds of threads about AI rate limits, usage confusion, surprise throttling. That was my signal.
Built TokenBar (https://www.tokenbar.site/) — $4.99 macOS menu bar app. Tracks AI usage limits across 20+ providers.
Validation tip: search Reddit for complaint threads. If people are actively frustrated about a problem, the market exists.
That’s a smart approach, Reddit and forums are full of unfiltered pain points that don’t show up in surveys.
TokenBar is a great example of turning those signals into a tangible solution quickly.
If you’re exploring other problems or ideas, I actually help founders map these early signals into actionable validation so you can figure out which problems are worth solving before building.
Out of curiosity, did you notice any patterns in the complaints that made you confident this was the one to tackle first?
Thanks for the great insight! Do you have any tips on how to convert interest into actual customers, and how to go about marketing to said interest groups without sounding forced?
The key is first understanding why they’re interested and what problem they’re trying to solve. Once that’s clear, your messaging can speak directly to that pain without feeling forced.
Start with micro-experiments emails, landing pages, or small ads targeting that specific