I built an AI that handles your entire product launch — roadmap, copy, submissions, all verified live
Most founders I know ship a great product and then freeze on distribution.
Not because they don't care. Because the launch surface is overwhelming — which subreddits, what copy for each, which directories are worth submitting to, did that listing actually go live. It's a full-time job on top of building.
So I built Zarek.
You paste your product URL. Zarek reads it, builds a full 6-phase launch roadmap, and writes every piece of copy — your X thread, Show HN post, LinkedIn, Reddit, Product Hunt. It finds the right subreddits, newsletters, and influencers with budgets and pitches. It submits directories automatically and verifies each listing is actually live. You get a daily briefing on exactly what to do next.
Not a checklist. Not a template. The actual work, done.
I'm looking for founders who are launching soon (or right now) to put it through a real workflow and tell me what's broken.
Early access is free. Would love brutal feedback.
— wangc
I like that you’re handling the verification part too. Getting the copy written is easy enough now, but actually knowing whether a submission went through is where a lot of time gets wasted.
I’m curious how this works for very small teams that don’t have anyone handling marketing yet. A lot of early stage founders are also relying on interns or junior people to help with things like research and outreach, so I can see Zarek being useful there too.
That's exactly the gap Zarek is built for. Verification sounds minor until you've spent an hour wondering if a directory submission actually landed — or checking three weeks later to find it didn't.
On small teams: that's the core use case. Zarek doesn't assume you have a marketing person. It assumes you have a founder with a URL and not enough hours. The research, the copy, the submissions, the follow-up — it runs the whole thing so no one has to own "launch coordinator" as a job title.
The intern angle is interesting though. A few beta users have mentioned using the output as a brief for someone junior to execute on — the roadmap and copy are already done, so the intern is just pulling levers, not making decisions. Hadn't planned for that use case but it fits naturally.
If you want to run it on something real, early access is open — would genuinely value the feedback.
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com
Yeah, that’s actually where I think an intern can be really useful. If Zarek already handles the research, copy and roadmap, someone junior could take care of the execution, submissions and follow ups while you stay focused on the product.
I’m actually building SpiderSkill for this exact use case, helping early stage founders find students for internships. You can post an internship for free and see if you find someone who fits what you need. Might be worth trying for Zarek, especially if you’re looking to scale the launch side without taking it all on yourself.
The intern-as-executor model makes sense when the decisions are already made. That's exactly what Zarek sets up — the roadmap and copy are done, so whoever runs execution is pulling levers, not guessing.
SpiderSkill is a natural fit for that gap. Will take a look — if the right person shows up, handing off the submission and follow-up layer while staying focused on the product is a clean split.
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com
The intern-as-executor model makes sense when the decisions are already made. That's exactly what Zarek sets up — the roadmap and copy are done, so whoever runs execution is pulling levers, not guessing.
SpiderSkill is a natural fit for that gap. Will take a look — if the right person shows up, handing off the submission and follow-up layer while staying focused on the product is a clean split.
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com
This hits close to home — I just spent the better part of today figuring out where to even list a product on IH itself (product page vs. post, tags, visibility settings...). Multiply that by every directory and it's exactly the "full-time job on top of building" problem you're describing.
The "verifies each listing is actually live" part is the detail that sells it for me. Half the pain of manual submission isn't writing the copy, it's not knowing if the thing actually went through or silently failed.
Curious how it handles products that are self-hosted/niche (not typical SaaS) — does it still find the right subreddits/directories for something more infrastructure-y, or is it tuned mostly for consumer SaaS launches? Following this, might put it through its paces with my next launch.
The IH product page situation is a perfect example — the friction isn't the writing, it's every small decision that has no obvious right answer and costs 20 minutes to figure out. Multiply that by 40 directories and you've lost a week.
On infrastructure and self-hosted products: it handles them well, actually better than consumer SaaS in some ways. The subreddit and community targeting is based on what the product actually does, not a generic "SaaS launch" template — so something infrastructure-y gets r/selfhosted, r/devops, r/homelab, Hacker News, relevant newsletters, not the standard indie maker circuit.
Directories are more hit or miss for niche infra — there are fewer of them and quality varies — but Zarek surfaces the ones that are worth it and skips the ones that aren't.
When you're ready for that next launch, put it through. That's exactly the kind of product I want more data on — the non-obvious cases are where it either earns the claim or doesn't.
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com
The “actual work, done” positioning is a strong distinction from another launch checklist. I’m curious which part founders trust Zarek with least when they first try it.
Good question — and the answer is consistent: the copy.
Founders come in skeptical that an AI can write a Show HN post or a Reddit pitch that doesn't read like a press release. That's the part they want to rewrite before it goes anywhere. Which is fair — bad community copy is worse than no post at all.
What usually happens is they read the draft, tweak a sentence or two, and ship it. By the second channel they stop editing as much. By the third they trust it.
The submissions and verification they hand off immediately — nobody's precious about whether a directory form got filled out correctly. The copy is where the founder's voice feels at stake, so that's where the skepticism lives.
Curious what your instinct is — is there a part you'd want to stay in control of?
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com
Good question — and the answer is consistent: the copy.
Founders come in skeptical that an AI can write a Show HN post or a Reddit pitch that doesn't read like a press release. That's the part they want to rewrite before it goes anywhere. Which is fair — bad community copy is worse than no post at all.
What usually happens is they read the draft, tweak a sentence or two, and ship it. By the second channel they stop editing as much. By the third they trust it.
The submissions and verification they hand off immediately — nobody's precious about whether a directory form got filled out correctly. The copy is where the founder's voice feels at stake, so that's where the skepticism lives.
Curious what your instinct is — is there a part you'd want to stay in control of?
https://zarek.tech | wangc2016217@gmail.com