I’m launching on Product Hunt in 12 days with zero customers. Here’s my exact plan.
Most founders wait until they have traction before launching on Product Hunt. I’m doing it the other way around.
ReleaseLog launches on May 13th. Today I have zero customers, zero sign-ups, and two Twitter followers. I’m telling you this because I think the honest version of this story is more useful than the polished one.
Here’s what I’m actually doing between now and launch day.
Not running ads. No budget, no interest. Every customer I get before May 13th will come from a real conversation with a real founder who had a real problem I could help with.
Showing up on IH every day. Not to promote ReleaseLog. To be genuinely useful in threads where I actually have something to add. The founders I’ve been talking to for the past few days are the warmest people I’ll have on launch day. That’s the whole strategy.
Using my own product publicly. Our changelog, roadmap, and feature request board are all live. Anyone can submit a feature, vote on what gets built next, and watch it happen. https://tryreleaselog.com/p/releaselog-building-in-public/requests
Not adding features. One rule until I hit 5 paying customers — no new features. The product works. The only problem left to solve is distribution.
The goal for May 13th isn’t to hit #1. It’s to have enough genuine relationships built that when I post “we’re live,” the people I’ve been talking to actually know my name.
If you’re building something and want to swap notes on the pre-launch grind, drop it below. Twelve days is enough time to do this right.
The real problem solving skills and awareness always comes from talking to people who are really facing it daily
Love the fresh perspective—this actually gave me a lot to think about. I'll definitely be following along and learning from your journey!
Same time window from the post launch side, I'm 3 weeks past launch, and the thing I wish I'd known prelaunch is that the W1 push numbers don't predict W2 signups
at all.
W1 I did 17 cold touches, got 0 signups. W2 I did 8 (fewer, tighter), got 3. None of those 3 came from W2 outreach — they all traced back to passive stuff from the 2-3 weeks before launch: an awesome-* list PR merged before W1 even started, a Supabase Discord showcase post that delivered a user 3 days later, an SEO backlink that compounded silently. PH launch is probably less "the moment" than the 12 days of compounding you do beforehand.
Specific swap-notes question since you asked: pre-launch content (one long-form post somewhere your buyer already reads) or pre-launch distribution (lists / communities you'll be findable in afterward)? I went distribution-heavy and underweighted content — would love to compare if you're going the other way.
SPB = StatusPageBuddy (free hosted status pages for indie projects). Different category from ReleaseLog, same indie-dev buyer. Happy to share more numbers if useful.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule combined with "be genuinely useful on IH" is the right combo. I'm doing almost the exact same playbook for ClipForge — an AI video repurposing tool I'm bootstrapping. I set up a Gumroad presence months before writing real code, just to see if anyone cared. That signal-to-noise filter is invaluable.
One thing I'd add: build a distribution asset before launch day. I wrote a short guide on Gumroad about my validation workflow. It doesn't drive revenue, but it gives me something specific to point people to when t
hey ask "what do you do?" Every download is a relationship started on my terms, not theirs.
Question for you: what's your plan for the 12 hours after the PH listing goes live? I've heard from multiple founders that the real battle isn't getting featured — it's having people show up in the first few hours to vote and comment. Curious how you're solving that.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is outstanding. Here's a different angle.
I'm building something where there are no paying customers by design. Code on the Go is a free, open-source Android IDE, nonprofit-funded, no monetization model. Here's a ccrresponding rule: no new features until the existing ones have been used to build something real.
It's about attention management, not revenue. Without it, you add features because it feels productive and nobody can tell you you're wrong until the customers don't show up, as someone already said.
Your "show up and be genuinely useful" approach is what I believe in too, for the same reason: relationships built before you need them are worth more than any launch tactic. That part of your plan is the right call regardless of what Product Hunt or any other index site does for you on May 13th.
A question for you: how are you deciding which threads are worth your time vs. which ones you're just adding noise to? Good luck on the 13th.
-David
The "no new features until existing ones have been used to build something real" is a cleaner version of the same constraint for a context where revenue doesn't exist as a signal. You've replaced the financial indicator with a usage indicator, which is actually harder to game — someone paying $12 is a signal, but someone building something real with your tool is a stronger one. On deciding which threads are worth time, the filter is whether I have something specific to say about their situation, not something general about their topic. If my comment could have been written by anyone who read the post title, it's noise. If it requires actually understanding what they're building and where they're stuck, it might be worth something. The threads I've gotten the most from are always the ones where I learned something by writing the comment. Good luck with Code on the Go, David.
Killed it Released log. One gap I see with sub-$20M founders: you look small to M&A brokers even after raising.
I build 48hr “Acquisition Optics Packs” — CEO clip + Forbes draft + deck. $2.5K. No intros = refund.
Details in my Twitter pinned. 1 slot left.
I have also launched a new product please check let me know what things should i do next to make it more better. howtowatch .io
Love this approach - prioritizing genuine relationships over vanity metrics is what actually drives sustainable growth. The fact that you're already showing up authentically in the IH community puts you ahead of 90% of other pre-launch founders.
Appreciate it! Hope to see you on the 13th. Are you working on anything?
Curious — what's your single biggest concern about hitting day 1 with zero customers? In my own pre-launch the bigger risk wasn't the launch-day numbers themselves, it was that without 5-10 people primed 48h before, the early-hour algorithm signal just doesn't fire. Even DM-ing past commenters or relevant founders ahead of time helped more than I expected.
The early-hour algorithm signal is the thing I'm most focused on right now — not the total upvote count but whether enough people show up in the first two hours to give the listing momentum before it gets buried. The 48h pre-prime window is going into the plan this week. My single biggest concern isn't the number on launch day, it's that the conversations I've been having don't translate into people who actually show up at the right time. Warm relationships that don't convert to minute-zero support are just nice exchanges. Working on closing that gap between "people who know my name" and "people who will be there on May 13th” What was your launch?
Haven't launched yet — judging July 9 (Thu) on go/no-go.
Still 2 months out, so I'm sitting in the same gap you're describing.
The "warm exchanges that don't convert to minute-zero support" problem is the one I keep coming back to. My hypothesis: DMs and comments build name recognition, but minute-zero needs a different muscle — people who've already committed a calendar slot, not just goodwill.
Haven't validated it yet though.
48h pre-prime sounds like the right call. Curious — are you doing hunter outreach now, or waiting until closer to launch?
The calendar slot vs goodwill is a great distinction. Goodwill gets you "I'll try to check it out." A committed time gets you someone at 12:01 AM. The TokRepo founder in this thread described building a "launch warriors" list, 25-30 founders who explicitly commit to upvoting at a specific time, not just when they get around to it. That's the muscle you're describing. On hunter outreach, haven't started yet, planning to reach out in the next few days. A hunter with an existing following changes the minute-zero math significantly but it's outside your control. Worth trying, not worth depending on. July 9th gives you a real runway, how are you spending the next two months?
Two months is a real runway — agreed. Rough sketch of how I'm thinking about it (still adjusting):
Weeks 1-3: ship the assets I'd want to point at on launch day — a manifesto post that explains the "why," a few result pages that demonstrate the product on actual brands, and one honest comparison piece against existing tools. Goal isn't traffic during these weeks, it's having something substantial to link to.
Weeks 4-6: start the warm-up you described — finding the right hunter is high-leverage but unreliable, so I'm treating it as upside, not load-bearing. Building a small list of founders who fit the "calendar slot" definition.
Weeks 7-8: tighten the PH page itself, write Show HN, and do D-1 reminders. Boring but necessary.
The "launch warriors" framing is sharper than what I had.
Going to steal that, thanks.
Curious — when you're picking the 25-30 founders, are you filtering by audience overlap or just trust level?
Trust level first, audience overlap second. A founder with 10k followers who barely knows your name is worth less than a founder with 200 followers who's been in three real conversations with you. The minute-zero upvote needs to come from someone who actually wants you to win, not someone doing a social favour for a stranger. The audience overlap is a bonus if they happen to have followers who are your target customer, great. But I'd never trade depth of relationship for size of following when building the warriors list. The 25-30 who show up reliably are the ones who've had a reason to care before launch day. Your week 1-3 assets are actually the thing that builds that founders who read your manifesto and comparison piece before July 9th are warmer than ones who see the PH listing cold.
You’re getting a lot of strong advice on validation, distribution, and timing.
But stepping back from all of it, there’s one piece that isn’t fully defined yet.
What outcome between now and May 13th would actually change your belief that “the product works”?
Right now the launch itself becomes the test, which means everything leading up to it gets interpreted in that direction.
Conversations feel like validation, interest feels like traction, and even a weak result post-launch can still be explained as a distribution problem.
That’s where it gets hard to separate signal from momentum.
It becomes clear when you realize you don’t actually have a condition that would make you pause before May 13th.
If you recognize that, run the 3-minute scan here: https://growthdriverengine.com
The signal vs momentum conflation is a real trap and worth sitting with honestly. The condition that would make me pause before May 13th is if every conversation I had this week confirmed the problem doesn't exist or isn't painful enough to pay $12 to solve. That's the falsifiable version. The date is fixed but the belief isn't the conversations are the test, not the launch.
That’s a solid way to frame it. Most people never even get to a falsifiable condition.
The only thing I’d push on slightly is where that condition lives.
Right now it still depends on how you interpret the conversations after they happen.
If 5 people say it’s painful but don’t pay, is that signal or momentum?
If no one pays but everyone “gets it”, is that a messaging issue or a problem issue?
It’s still easy to explain the outcome either way once you’re already in it.
The tricky part is defining something that forces a decision before interpretation kicks in.
Something that makes you pause even if the conversations feel good.
That’s usually where overcommitment sneaks in, not from lack of thinking, but from flexible interpretation.
If that gap feels familiar, that’s exactly what the 3 minute scan is built to surface:
https://growthdriverengine.com
Really like this approach — especially the focus on conversations over trying to “manufacture” traction.
I’m in a very similar stage right now and starting to realize that talking to a few real users gives way more clarity than any amount of building or planning.
Also +1 on the “no new features” rule — that’s honestly the hardest part.
Curious — how are you deciding which conversations are worth going deeper on vs just general feedback?
The ones worth going deeper on usually reveal themselves by the specificity of the problem they describe. Vague frustration is everywhere. Someone who can tell you exactly when the problem happens, what they tried before, and why it didn't work that's the conversation worth an hour. The other signal is when they ask a follow-up question unprompted. One reply and done is polite engagement. A second message means something landed. What are you building?
That makes a lot of sense — especially the part about specificity. I’m starting to see the same thing even in early conversations.
I’m working on Podalyze AI — a tool for podcasters that turns one episode into a full content kit (summaries, highlights, social posts, etc.) and also lets you ask questions about the episode.
Right now I’m trying to figure out if this is something people would actually use consistently or just try once.
Curious from your perspective — would you consider this more of a “must-have” or “nice-to-have” type of tool?
Honest take, right now it sits closer to nice-to-have, but that's a positioning problem not a product problem. The must-have version of Podalyze is the one where a podcaster with 10 episodes and a growing audience realizes they're leaving distribution on the table every single week. The tool that makes repurposing feel like zero extra work rather than a task they keep skipping is the one that becomes essential. The question I'd ask your early users isn't "do you like this" it's "what happened the last time you published an episode and didn't repurpose it." If the answer is "nothing, I just moved on" it's nice-to-have. If the answer is "I felt like I wasted it" you're closer to must-have than you think. What do your early users say when you ask them that?
This is super helpful — especially that framing of “nice-to-have vs must-have”.
That question you suggested actually hits hard. I think a lot of people just move on after publishing without thinking about what they missed.
So far I haven’t had many real user conversations yet (just started outreach), but this gives me a much clearer direction on what to ask.
Feels like the real value is not “generate content” but helping them not feel like they’re wasting what they already created.
Really appreciate this — I’m going to test that angle in my next conversations.
That reframe is the one. "Don't waste what you already made" is a loss aversion message and those land harder than gain messages almost every time. The podcast is already done the work is finished and the repurposing gap feels like leaving something on the table rather than a new task to complete. That's a completely different emotional hook than "create more content faster." Test that angle in your next conversations and pay attention to whether the energy in the room changes when you say it that way. Good luck with the outreach.
I kinda love the idea of putting an actual face to the phrase "building in public". Now building in public gets more clarity. I hope you succeed. Will follow your journey.
Thank you! See you on the 13th🫡
The "no audience" framing is honest and what most pre-launch posts gloss over. One thing I'd push back on slightly though: the prep phase you described starts already late if launch is in 12 days. From everything I've researched on PH launches in the filmmaker/creative-tools space, the honest minimum effective warm-up is 4-6 weeks — daily upvotes (3-5/day in your category), substantive comments on launches in your topics, and following 20-30 makers in your niche before your launch day. Twelve days is enough to assemble assets, not enough to register as a "real maker" in the algorithm.
Alternative path that worked for several creator-tool launches I've seen: skip the cold launch entirely. Use the 12 days to build a 100-200 person waiting list (anywhere — landing page, Twitter DMs to 50 specific people in your niche, beta on IH), then launch with the waiting list as your day-1 visit + comment seed. Algorithm cares more about velocity in the first 2 hours than total upvote count, and a warm waiting list gives you that velocity.
Either way, your "exact plan" is already more thorough than most launches, so this might not change much. But if you're seeing 10-20 upvotes by hour 4 on launch day, the cold-launch hypothesis is confirmed for your category and you'll know what to do differently next time.
The 4-6 week minimum is the part I can't change at this point so I'm not going to pretend it isn't a real constraint. You're right that 12 days builds assets more than it builds algorithm standing. The waiting list path is interesting I've been thinking about it as a byproduct of conversations rather than an active target, which might be the wrong frame. The TokRepo founder in this thread shared that 25 committed launch warriors at minute zero mattered more than total upvote count, which maps to your velocity point. The honest answer is May 13th is happening regardless the question is whether I walk in with 25 warm people or 250. Trying to get closer to the latter. If I'm seeing 10-20 upvotes by hour 4 I'll know exactly what you meant by this comment.
The thing that stands out most here isn't the plan — it's the framing. Starting with 'zero customers, zero signups, two Twitter followers' instead of burying that detail is what makes people actually trust you. Most launch posts start at the polished beginning; this one starts at the real beginning. The 'no new features until 5 paying customers' rule is the kind of hard constraint that only works because you said it out loud — now you've got accountability from a few hundred people watching. Curious if you've noticed any pattern yet in which founders actually respond to your IH conversations vs. which ones just lurk and never engage.
The pattern I'm noticing is that founders who are currently in the grind zero customers, recent launch, stuck on distribution reply almost every time. Founders who are further along or more established tend to lurk. Which makes sense: the post speaks directly to where the first group is right now. The ones who engage are the ones who recognize themselves in it. The lurkers might be watching but they're not in the same moment anymore. The accountability point is exactly why I said the numbers out loud a private rule is just an intention. A public one has witnesses.
This is the right approach.
Most people hide at 0 users and then try to “launch” to strangers.
What you’re doing is basically building distribution before the product matters.
I’ve been shipping small paid apps and I keep running into the same wall:
the product works, but nobody knows it exists.
One thing I’m curious about:
how are you tracking these early conversations?
Are you just doing it manually or do you have a lightweight system to follow up before launch day?
Because I feel like that part becomes messy very fast.
Manually right now a simple note for each founder I've had a real exchange with, what they're building, what we talked about, whether they're warm enough to message on launch day. Nothing sophisticated. The messiness you're describing hasn't fully hit yet at day 3 but I can see it coming. The TokRepo founder in this thread mentioned tracking every conversation in a sheet with their stack, stage, and what they care about that's probably where I need to get to before the 13th. "Building distribution before the product matters" is the cleanest version of what I'm trying to do that I've read. What are the small paid apps?
Appreciate that and yeah, I think the “messiness” phase comes fast once conversations scale.
On my side, I’ve been building small paid iOS utilities.
Things like:
Nothing huge individually, but the idea is:
small, focused tools that solve one problem well.
What I’ve learned so far:
distribution matters way more than the build itself.
That’s why your approach resonates — you’re basically solving that part first.
Curious to see how your tracking evolves before launch,
because that seems like the real bottleneck.
A completely different and very interesting approach to a BIG problem, and the problem the tool tries to solve can also be useful to many founders. I liked it... Good luck on the rest of your journey, may you be well accompanied by many clients and by LUCK!
Thank you, I’m glad you liked it! Hope to see you on the 13th!
The pre-launch content push is smart. One thing that really helped me before launching my Firefox extension: joining niche communities early and contributing genuine value before the launch. r/firefox and r/startpages had regulars who became my first installs—not because I promoted to them, but because I was already a known participant.
Also on the Product Hunt angle: the upvote velocity in the first 2 hours matters most. Building that internal list of supporters who will upvote at launch time (not the day before, not whenever they get around to it) is worth mapping out explicitly.
The "known participant before the ask" mechanic is the same thing I'm trying to build on IH you're right that it works across any community where humans gate the door. The subreddit angle is something I hadn't mapped out yet for launch day specifically. On the first 2 hour velocity the TokRepo founder in this thread made the same point and it's changed how I'm thinking about launch day. The list of people who will upvote at a specific time, not just "when they get around to it," is the difference between velocity and a slow trickle. Building that list explicitly this week. Which subreddits ended up being the highest yield for the Firefox extension?
Love the honest approach! With zero audience, the key is treating PH launch as a single-day event, not the launch strategy. Tactics that work: 1) DM individual users who commented on PH launches in your category in the past 6 months—they're proven early adopters; 2) Post your launch in niche communities 24h before ( Indie Hackers, relevant subreddits, Slack groups)—even 5-10 genuine advocates matters; 3) Create a "launch bundle" with free tier or limited-time pricing to give people a reason to act NOW rather than "I'll check back later." Your "no features until 5 paying customers" rule is brilliant because it forces you into real conversations. Those 5 customers matter more than 500 upvotes.
The PH commenter DM angle is the one I hadn't considered proven early adopters who've already signaled interest in the category is a smarter cold outreach target than random founders. Adding that to the pre-launch list this week. On the launch bundle I've been resistant to discounting because the $12 price point is already the positioning, but a limited free trial extension or a bonus for launch day sign-ups might thread that needle without undermining the monthly price. Worth thinking through. "5 customers matter more than 500 upvotes" is the whole thesis and I'm glad it's landing that way. What have you launched?
This mirrors something I'm trying right now: shipped a simple free version first just to see if the positioning actually lands.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule stood out. One thing I keep seeing: signup isn't a strong signal early on. People sign up and disappear.
Sustained use feels like a better bar, even if the number is smaller.
Curious how you handle the IH threads in practice. How do you keep it genuinely useful without it turning into soft pre-launch warming?
The signup vs sustained use point is right and it's actually why I set the bar at paying customers rather than signups. Payment is the strongest signal that the problem is real and the solution landed sustained use without payment is encouraging but it doesn't tell you enough. On keeping IH genuine the honest answer is I only comment when I actually have something to say. The filter is simple: would I write this comment if I wasn't building ReleaseLog? If the answer is no, it's soft promotion dressed as engagement and people feel it. The threads where I've had the best conversations are the ones where I forgot I was supposed to be doing distribution. What's the free version you shipped?
It's Folioverse, an AI mentor for designers writing UX case studies. The free version is uxcase.app, a static template plus 7-question audit using the same questions the full product asks. Same audience, lower commitment ask. Just shipped the full setup notes as a post here on IH today if you want the funnel breakdown.
The "forgot I was doing distribution" framing matches how I'm thinking about it too. The threads where I'm genuinely curious about someone's setup tend to be the ones where I learn the most.
Web page is looking good. I hope the product will be more good than the webpage. Eagerly waiting for your product to launch..
Appreciate it! Hope to see you on may 13th.
Likewise! Looking forward to it on May 13th.
Same boat, launched Treelance yesterday and plan to follow your playbook of showing up on IH genuinely first, post the launch later this week. The discipline of distribution-before-features is a good call (finding it hard to do as I keep going back to building). Good luck with May 13th.
Treelance just launched yesterday and you're already thinking about distribution that's the right sequence even if it's hard to hold. The pull back to building doesn't go away, you just have to keep making the same decision every morning. Good luck with the IH post this week. Drop it here and I'll return the favour.
Refusing to write another line of code until you have five customers is the ultimate force push for your distribution strategy. You are effectively turning your pre-launch grind into a durability test for your relationship moat rather than just another Product Hunt gamble.
How are you handling the urge to fix just one more thing while you are out there hunting for those first few customers?
The urge is constant. Every day something small surfaces that I could fix in twenty minutes. The thing that makes the rule hold is that I said it publicly now breaking it has a cost beyond just my own discipline. The other thing that helps is that every hour I spend in a real conversation is an hour I'm not sitting in the codebase looking for problems to solve. Staying in the distribution work crowds out the building instinct more than willpower does. The rule doesn't eliminate the urge, it just makes acting on it more expensive than ignoring it.
I'm totally with you. As a designer, whenever I see the gap between my carefully crafted Figma mockups and the actual live screen, I feel a huge urge to fix every single pixel but I hold it back. I keep telling myself, 'Now is not the time for that.' Instead, I find comfort in sharing these frustrations with fellow makers who feel the same, drawing inspiration and support from our shared journey.
The Figma-to-live gap is the designer's version of the feature urge and it might actually be harder to ignore because it's visible every time you open the product. At least my unbuilt features are hypothetical yours are right there on screen reminding you. The "now is not the time for that" mantra is the right one. Shared frustrations with people in the same moment is underrated as a coping mechanism. Glad I’ve been able to help!!
This hit me. I realize I’ve been trying to get users without really talking to them directly.
The idea of building real conversations before launch is something I probably underestimated. How are you finding the right founders to talk to at this stage?
Honestly the right founders find the posts more than I find them. The threads where I show up and add something real attract the founders who are thinking about the same problems they're already in the room. The ones I seek out directly are the ones who post honestly about where they're stuck. Zero customers, distribution problems, honest build in public updates those are the founders closest to the problem ReleaseLog solves and the ones where the conversation goes somewhere real. The filter isn't demographic, it's whether they're currently in the grind. What are you building?
I wanna try it
You can start for free! Tryreleaselog.com
Good looking webpage, like the concept as well.
Appreciate it. Come back on May 13th for the product hunt launch!
This is a strong approach. The part that stood out to me is “every customer will come from a real conversation with a real founder who had a real problem.”
I’m in a similar early validation stage with Tradi, trying to learn how founders choose tools and which advice they trust before buying.
How are you deciding which founders or threads are actually worth spending time on before launch? Are you looking for specific pain signals, product category fit, recent launches, or just conversations where you can genuinely help?
The filter I use is simple, can I actually add something to this conversation or am I just looking for an opening? If I have to force a connection it's the wrong thread. The ones worth spending time on usually have a real problem stated clearly, not just a win to celebrate. Recent launchers with zero customers, founders stuck on distribution, people asking honest questions about what's working those are the threads where I have something genuine to contribute and where the person reading is also closest to the problem ReleaseLog solves. Product category fit matters less than whether the founder is in the grind right now. What's Tradi trying to learn specifically is it about tool discovery or the trust layer before purchase?
That distinction is really helpful. For Tradi, I’m focused more on the trust layer before purchase than just tool discovery.
The question I’m trying to understand is: when a founder is in the grind and needs a tool, what makes one recommendation feel worth acting on versus just another noisy suggestion? Is it who said it, the context, proof from similar founders, Reddit comments, a live demo, or seeing someone solve the same problem?
Your filter of “can I actually add something here?” is a good one. When you find those threads, how do you usually decide what to recommend or share without it feeling like you’re forcing your product into the conversation?
The trust layer question is exactly what ReleaseLog sits inside, a founder who sees another founder using their own product publicly to build in the open is getting proof from a similar context, not a sales pitch. The recommendation that feels worth acting on is usually the one where the person sharing it has the same problem, not just knowledge of the solution. On forcing the product into conversation the honest answer is I don't mention it unless the thread is already about user communication, changelogs, or keeping users informed. If I have to create the connection it's not the right thread. The natural version happens when someone describes shipping updates nobody sees, or losing a user who didn't know about a feature. At that point mentioning ReleaseLog isn't a pitch, it's just the answer to the question they're already asking.
That’s a really useful distinction, “context” vs “belief.”
The email list being the moment the doubt breaks makes sense because it turns validation from an abstract score into real evidence from strangers.
For Tradi, I’m starting to think the same may be true for software buying: founders may not fully trust a recommendation unless there’s some concrete artifact behind it, comparison notes, risk checklist, founder use cases, or evidence that similar teams chose it.
When you say “a concrete artifact they can point to,” what kind of artifact do you think would create the most trust before buying a tool: a ranked shortlist, side-by-side comparison, risk report, user examples, or something else?
Reading this Sunday night after my own pre-launch grind so it hit hard.
One concrete thing I wish I'd done earlier: ship Indexing API setup BEFORE you start writing landing copy. I just launched a $299/$999 pair of SKUs — what actually moved the needle wasn't the launch announcement, it was 22 SEO pages indexed in 2-3 hours instead of 2-3 weeks. By "launch day" I'll have 3 weeks of organic crawl already cooking.
The trick the Google docs hide: you can't add a service account through GSC UI for domain properties — you have to use the Site Verification API + DNS TXT manually. Took me 4 hours to figure out. Free tier covers 200 URLs/day, $0 cost forever. Two things I'd swap notes on: 1. How are you handling the "swap notes" replies you'll get from this post? 1:1 conversations are gold but kill your week. Do you batch them?
2. Are you publishing real metrics on launch day (signups, traffic, conversion)? Most builders skip this — Tony Dinh / Welsh / Kahl all do it and it compounds.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is the hardest part for engineers. Big respect for naming it publicly — that's the only thing that makes it stick.
Following ReleaseLog on the 13th. Happy to share the Porkbun automation script for the GSC + DNS thing if you want — just DM.
The Indexing API tip is going straight into this week's plan, 22 pages indexed in hours vs weeks is the kind of asymmetric return that's worth a Sunday night setup. On batching the swap notes replies, I'm not yet, it's day 3 and the volume is manageable, but I can already see how it becomes a week killer at scale. My current approach is one real reply per person, then let the conversation develop naturally rather than trying to maintain 20 simultaneous threads. On publishing real metrics launch day yes, full transparency. Signups, traffic, conversion, whatever the number is. The honest version of this story is more useful than the polished one and you're right that it compounds. What are you launching?
Like what you are doing, great way to start BTW
Much appreciated! Are you working on anything?
Nice idea!
Thank you! Are you working on anything?
Great strategy! The "no new features until 5 customers" rule is something I wish I'd known earlier. Looking forward to seeing how your launch goes on May 13th!
Appreciate it. The rule only works because I said it publicly now I'm accountable to it. See you on the 13th.
Love the “no features until 5 customers” rule.
I’m seeing something similar — most early-stage problems aren’t product gaps, they’re clarity + distribution gaps.
One thing I’m still figuring out:
conversations are great, but converting them into actual users feels like a different skill.
Curious what you’re doing to bridge that gap before launch?
Honestly still figuring that part out too. The conversations are happening but the bridge to conversion is the open problem. What I'm betting on is that the gap closes when someone in a conversation hits the exact frustration ReleaseLog solves a user who churned without explanation, a feature request they never closed the loop on. At that point the mention lands differently than it would cold. Whether that actually converts before May 13th is still the unanswered question. What are you building?
Hey, just wanted to drop in because I did exactly the opposite of what you're doing and you have my advice already: stick with it.
I launched StreamStash on Product Hunt yesterday. Cold launch, no audience, nothing pre-built. End of day one: 3 PH upvotes (one was mine), 1 free download and 0 paid sales.
The honest version of cold launching is that the numbers don't lie about the absence of relationships. Every conversion you see traces back to either someone who knew about the product before launch day, or a channel with pre-existing audience (directories, blogs, reviewers). The 3 PH upvoters were either kind strangers or people I already knew. There was no organic discovery without seed audience.
The strategy you're describing is exactly what I'd do differently if I were starting again. Twelve days of being genuinely useful in threads is twelve days of building the warm audience that converts on day one. I'm now playing catch-up on that. Pitching tech reviewers, asking for honest reviews in exchange for free licenses, slowly building a Discord. It works, but it's slower than starting with relationships in place.
One thing to add to your list: think about which subreddits and forums you'd want to post your launch announcement on, and start commenting in those subs now with helpful answers. Not as your product persona, just as a maker. Reddit specifically punishes new accounts hard if your first move is self-promotion. The relationship-first strategy isn't just about IH. It's about every channel where humans gate the door.
Also: "no new features until 5 paying customers" is a rule I wish I'd been stricter about. There's a real pull toward adding "just one more thing" in the final stretch when the same time would have been better spent on distribution. Distribution is the harder problem and the one most makers underinvest in.
Good luck on May 13th. Drop the launch link here when it goes up. I'll be one of your warm-audience people.
Great comment. Three upvotes, one download, zero sales from a cold launch isn't a failure story it's a data point that makes the whole relationship-first argument concrete instead of theoretical. The "every conversion traces back to someone who knew before launch day" line is going to stick with me. The Reddit advice is something I hadn't fully thought through starting to comment in the relevant subs now as a maker, not as ReleaseLog, is exactly the right sequencing and I would have gotten it wrong without this. Dropping the launch link here on May 13th. You'll be on the list.
Sounds like you're heading on the right path!
Best of luck with everything, excited to see how it goes for you.
Appreciate it! Will report back on the 13th with the honest version of how it went. Good luck with StreamStash.
This is the most honest pre-launch post I've read in a while. Respect.
"Every customer will come from a real conversation with a real founder who had a real problem" that's the whole game right there.
The no-new-features-until-5-paying-customers rule is discipline most builders never find.
One thing that might help between now and May 13th... I'm building Valeed, a tool that helps founders capture leads and run automated follow-up sequences to find out who's actually serious before building (or launch day).
Could be useful for building that warm audience you're talking about. Free to use.
Either way rooting for the launch.
I agree with you
ppreciate it. The "real conversation with a real founder" line is the whole strategy compressed glad it landed. On Valeed the lead capture and follow-up angle makes sense for pre-launch validation, will take a look. What stage are you at with it?
Great! You're focused on building a system that meets customer needs.
That's the goal. Appreciate it.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is something more founders need to hear. Building more features feels productive but it's just avoiding the distribution problem.
I launched my open source project last week with the same starting point. Zero audience, zero following. The thing that surprised me most was that genuine comments on other people's posts drove more attention than any of my own posts did. People check your profile when your comment is actually useful. They don't check your profile when you post about yourself.
Your approach of building real relationships before launch day is the right one. The people who know your name before you launch are the only ones who show up on day one. Everyone else is algorithmic luck.
One thing I'd add from my own experience: the conversations you're having in these threads right now are also content. The questions people ask you, the objections they raise, the language they use to describe their problems. All of that is material for your launch day copy. Pay attention to how people talk about the problem, not how you talk about the solution.
Good luck on May 13th.
People check your profile when your comment is actually useful, not when you post about yourself" that's the clearest version of why this approach works that I've read. The conversation-as-copy-research point is the one I'm taking away from this comment though. I've been in 20+ threads in three days and the language founders use to describe the problem is consistently different from how I'd describe the solution. That gap is exactly where landing page copy usually fails. Paying attention to that differently from today. What's the open source project?
It's called NOVAI. A Layer 1 blockchain I built from
scratch in Rust where AI entities are protocol
primitives instead of smart contracts. 65K lines,
1,100 tests, live devnet.
Actually just published a deep dive on the design
today: https://dev.to/0xdevc/ai-entities-as-protocol-primitives-why-i-didnt-use-smart-contracts-343d
Repo: github.com/0x-devc/NOVAI-node
Your point about the gap between how founders describe
the problem vs how you describe the solution is
something I'm learning the hard way right now with
distribution. Good luck with the PH launch.
65K lines and 1,100 tests on a solo build is a serious technical achievement and AI entities as protocol primitives is a genuinely interesting design decision. The distribution challenge for something that technical is the hardest version of the problem, the people who can evaluate the architecture aren't the same people who'd be your first adopters, and the people who'd use it first often can't read the deep dive. The gap between how you'd describe it to a Rust developer vs how you'd describe it to someone building an AI product on top of it is probably where the copy work lives. Good luck with NOVAI, will check out the dev.to post.
Same shape from TokRepo's PH 8 weeks ago, with one calibration that changed how I count yield.
Of 47 pre-launch conversations: 12 (25%) became day-zero upvotes, 8 became paying users in month-1. That's the obvious win.
But the actual yield was the 6 conversations that forced a product pivot — small ones, like cutting a 4-step flow to 2 because every other founder asked "wait, where do I paste the API key?". Those pivots compounded post-launch more than the upvote count did.
The "real conversation" filter that worked for me: end every call with "what would I have to change for you to actually use this Monday?". If they can't answer, the call was about empathy not product. Empathy doesn't ship — Monday-tests do.
The pivot yield being higher than the upvote yield is the part nobody talks about because it doesn't show up in launch day metrics. Eight paying users is the visible win. Six conversations that cut a 4-step flow to 2 is the one that compounds invisibly. The Monday test question is getting added to every conversation I have this week "what would I have to change for you to actually use this Monday" is cleaner than any feedback framework I've seen because it separates empathy from intent in one sentence. Of the 47 pre-launch conversations, how did you decide which ones were worth going deeper on versus keeping surface level?
Three signals I used to gate depth:
They named the Monday-blocker without prompting (5/47). 60-min calls, every one shipped.
They said the problem in their own product's language ("our retention" not "churn"). 18/47. 45-min calls, half shipped.
Generic "sounds interesting" (24/47). 10-min calls or async. No follow-up scheduled.
The 5 + 18 was my ship-cohort. The 24 was marketing-copy data, not product data. Mixing them up cost us a 2-week sprint on a feature "sounds interesting" people loved but never used.
Side note — anyone asking the depth question back at me is signaling they're already in the 5-pile. You just did.
The 5-pile signal is super useful . The distinction between "our retention" and "churn" as a language filter is something I can apply immediately founders who describe the problem in their own product's context are already one step closer to Monday than the ones using category language. The 2-week sprint on a feature the "sounds interesting" cohort loved but never used is exactly the mistake I'm trying to avoid by holding the no-new-features line. Going to steal this framework whole. Still planning to DM you the launch link on the 13th.
I agree that we shouldn’t introduce new features until we have our first paid subscriptions
The hardest part is actually holding the line when a good idea shows up. What are you building?
This is a bold move. Most people spend months over-engineering for a "perfect" launch, but you’re focusing one of the things that actually scales: genuine human connection.
I’m currently building my own product, but I’ll be honest—I’m definitely not brave enough to launch without a following or pre-traction like you're doing. It’s a refreshing approach to distribution.
Best of luck on the 13th! Looking forward to seeing how that "conversations-first" strategy pays off.
Appreciate it though I'd push back on the brave framing. It's less courage and more that waiting for a following before launching is its own kind of risk. You can wait six months for pre-traction that never arrives, or you can launch now and find out what's actually broken while it still costs nothing to fix. The conversations-first approach isn't bold, it's just the only free distribution available. What are you building?
With current AI powered trend, development is actually much faster than marketing or market fitting. I have the same struggles and you inspired me.
That asymmetry is the thing most technical founders figure out too late the build is the easy part now. Distribution and finding the right customer are still as hard as they ever were. Good luck with whatever you're working on.
As a researcher, I find your approach scientifically sound. Most founders treat launching like a lottery; you’re treating it like a controlled experiment.
I’m also an indie underdog, and I’m tired of the polished 'growth hacker' narratives. I’d much rather see the raw data of a pre-launch grind than a polished success story.
Quick question from a math perspective: Are you tracking the 'conversion' of these genuine conversations, or are you keeping it purely qualitative until May 13th?
Mostly qualitative right now with a light quantitative layer underneath. I'm tracking who I've had real exchanges with, what they're building, and whether they're warm enough to message on launch day, but I haven't put conversion rates on it yet because the sample size makes the numbers meaningless. What I am tracking is the ratio of conversations that generate a follow-up question vs ones that end after one reply. That's the closest thing I have to a leading indicator before May 13th gives me actual data. The honest version is the experiment doesn't have enough data points yet to be statistically sound but the qualitative signal is strong enough to keep running it. What are you researching?
I have also followed the same, I launched my product on product hint today with 0 x followers
Nice! What are you working on and how’d it go?
The “no new features until 5 paying customers” rule is especially smart. Hope the launch goes really well
Appreciate it. See you on the 13th.
Interested to see how this unfolds.
Thank you! I’ll check back in here on May 13th
very interesting!
Thank you! Check back in May 13th to see how it goes
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is the move most solo founders miss. I've watched so many get stuck in the feature loop because building feels productive while distribution feels uncertain. The fact that you're treating warm relationships as the actual launch prep puts you ahead of 90% of the people shipping to PH. Good luck on the 13th.
The uncertainty is exactly why building feels safer, code gives you feedback loops, distribution doesn't. Until it does. See you on the 13th.
aa
Honest pre-launch is underrated. Most founders wait until they have traction to show up. You're doing the opposite — showing up first, building the relationships, then launching into a warm audience. 12 days is enough if you're actually useful, not just talking about being useful. Following.
That last line is the whole test. What are you working on?
How and why did you choose such day to launch ? Is there a specific event or is it just your own motivation goal ? What stops you to launch right now and expand right away the basic features / the changelog board seems to be already working !
May 13th is a Tuesday PH launches perform best Tuesday through Thursday when the tech audience is most active. That's the how. The why is that a deadline turns "I'll launch eventually" into a specific day I'm accountable to publicly. Without it, there's always one more thing to do first. On launching right now nothing is stopping me technically, the product works. The reason I'm waiting is the relationships. Every day between now and May 13th is another conversation with a founder who might show up on launch day because they know my name, not because they stumbled onto a listing. The changelog is working, you're right. What are you building?
This is great insight for the release day ! It is great to set a timeline and deadline to be accountable ! And i think that you really can get some great insights from other founder here, me right now i am working on Stackmemo, a dashboard to keep track of tech stacks of side projects and saas that connects directly to providers like neon, cloudflare and such to have an unified view of the project !
This comment was deleted 3 days ago.
Very interesting
Thank you!
nice work u have in your website but try to improve it for seo too and not use react build instead of that use next js it give a cool fast and friend to seo
Appreciate it, SEO is on the radar. The stack is what it is for now, first goal is 5 paying customers before any rebuilds. Thanks for taking a look!
Love the honesty here. "No new features until 5 paying customers" is the discipline most solo builders miss — including me for a long time. I've been building AI tools from a camper in rural BC with zero external feedback loops, and the hardest part wasn't the code, it was resisting the urge to keep building instead of shipping and talking to people. 12 days with a clear constraint is a much smarter frame than "launch when it's ready." Good luck on the 13th.
Building AI tools from a camper in rural BC with zero external feedback loops is the most extreme version of the silence problem I've heard, no community, no co-founder, no casual conversations that accidentally surface whether something is working. The discipline to ship and talk to people in that environment is harder than anything I'm dealing with. Appreciate the kind words. What are you building out there?
The 'engage first, post second' framing is sharper than I'd thought about it. IH literally enforces it now (new accounts can't post immediately), so the platform is doing your strategy for you. The harder version is doing this on platforms that don't enforce it, like LinkedIn or X.
I'm 3 weeks into the same approach with 5 products and zero customers, and what surprised me is how much resistance my own brain throws up against the slow-and personal version.
The faster path always feels available even when I know it's a trap.
The "no new features until 5 paying" constraint is the right discipline. It forces the only problem worth solving.
Really looking forward to revisiting this in the future.
The brain resistance is the part nobody talks about because it sounds like a mindset problem rather than a strategy problem. But it's real the faster path feels available even when you've already decided it doesn't work. The IH enforcement point is sharp, the platform is basically making the argument for relationship-first by design. Five products, three weeks, zero customers you're in the same moment. The resistance doesn't go away but it does get easier to ignore when a real conversation happens. Good luck with all five. Which one are you most focused on right now?
that was great concept for the community
Thank you!
Respect for sharing this. most people hide behind “early traction.”
The interesting part isn’t the launch itself, it’s what happens after the spike. Plenty of Product Hunt launches drive traffic, but very few translate into real usage or retention.
Curious what’s your definition of success here beyond vanity metrics?
Three paying customers within two weeks of launch who found ReleaseLog through a conversation rather than the PH feed. Not the spike number, not the upvote count three people who had a real problem, understood what ReleaseLog does, and paid $12 for it without being pushed. That's the signal that tells me the positioning is right and the distribution approach works. Everything else is noise I'll have to resist paying attention to. What made you ask, did your own launch not translate the way you expected?
Pre-selling is the ultimate market research. Most people build for months before realizing they have little to no customers(like some of us) . You’re shipping revenue while they’re shipping code
Appreciate it but I should be honest I'm in the "little to no customers" camp right now too. Zero sign-ups, zero MRR, three days in. The difference is just that I've stopped adding features and started having conversations. Whether that translates into actual revenue by May 13th is still the open question. What are you building?
Building Claimory a collision shop management platform, Different situation than yours though, my distribution is mostly offline. I have a good network of friends in the industry who walk into shops with brochures, show the product, and it lands without needing online marketing to do the heavy lifting. There are thousands of body shops in LA and word travels fast in this business.
That's an unfair advantage I don't take for granted, and I'm aware it doesn't translate to most software founders. Online distribution is a different game and the one you're playing is harder than mine.
For what it's worth, your "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is the part of your post I respect the most. That's the discipline that gets people from zero to one. Most founders fail there.
Keep me posted on May 13th, rooting for you.
Took a quick look at your page.
The idea is solid, but the first line feels more like a general statement than a clear outcome.
It tells me what it’s about, but not immediately why I should care or what problem it solves.
Might be worth making that sharper so the value clicks faster.
Fair and useful, thank you for actually clicking through. "Feels more like a general statement than a clear outcome" is the right diagnosis. What would make it click faster for you, is it missing the problem, the outcome, or both? Would genuinely help to know what you'd expect to read in that first line.
This is a brutally honest and solid plan. "Not adding features" until you hit 5 paying customers is the exact cure for the "Paralyzed Visionary" trap.
Most developers get stuck endlessly building features because coding feels safe, while launching means facing the risk of zero customers. You're confronting the hard part head-on.
I recently built a diagnostic tool to help developers identify their specific avoidance patterns (like hiding behind new features instead of launching). I built a free test for this - the link is in my bio if you want to check your own pattern.
Sticking to your May 13th date and doing direct outreach is 90% of the battle. Good luck!
"Paralyzed Visionary" is a good name for it the feature trap feels like productivity because the feedback loop is immediate. Ship a feature, see it work, feel progress. Talk to customers, hear nothing back, feel stuck. The avoidance pattern makes complete sense even when you know it's happening. Good luck with the diagnostic tool that's a real problem worth solving.
Exactly right — and the cruel part is the pattern persists even after you've identified it, which is what makes it feel so trapped.
The diagnostic tool actually ended up diagnosing me first. The AI told me I was "preserving the possibility of being successful someday" rather than actually pursuing it. That one hit hard.
Would love to hear which pattern you get if you try it.
Respect the honesty here.
One thing I’d challenge: conversations alone won’t convert if the value isn’t instantly clear.
When someone lands on your page, they should get “what this does + why it matters” in 5 seconds.
Right now the strategy is strong, but the positioning might be the bottleneck.
Two comments pointing at the same thing from someone who actually looked that's signal worth acting on. You're right that warm relationships don't convert if the page loses them in the first five seconds. The conversation gets them to click, the landing page has to close it. Going to rewrite that first line today. If you have ten seconds I'd genuinely value your take on what's missing problem, outcome, or both?
This is the right instinct. The useful-threads-first part matters more than the Product Hunt date, because it gives you proof that people understand the problem before launch day.
One thing I’d add: pick a tiny validation target that is harder than “people said nice things.” For Luota I’m treating it as: can I get 2-5 people to wire one real async workflow into the product and tell me whether the alert/evidence is actually useful?
For ReleaseLog maybe the equivalent is: can 3-5 teams publish one real changelog/request board and have a customer or teammate interact with it before PH? That would make launch day feel less like a first test and more like amplification.
This is a solid take.
One thing I’d add:
Even if they get 3-5 teams using it, conversion still depends on how clearly the value clicks in seconds.
If someone sees the page and doesn’t instantly get “why this matters,” those conversations won’t compound.
Curious, Have you tested different positioning angles yet?
Honestly I haven't tested different positioning angles yet. The page has been static since launch. You've diagnosed a legit problem though, definitely going to have to address it
That's a better target than anything I had written down. "People said nice things" is easy to collect and means nothing. Three founders who publish a real changelog and have someone interact with it before May 13th that's the validation that makes launch day amplification rather than experiment. Adopting this as the actual pre-launch goal starting today. What's Luota async workflow monitoring?
Launching with zero customers is brutal but props for having an actual plan.
Few thoughts from someone who's also building in public:
The 12-day countdown series is smart - builds anticipation. But make sure you're engaging in PH discussions NOW, not just showing up on launch day. The community can smell parachute launches.
For the email list building - are you planning warm outreach to people who might actually use it? Or just posting in communities and hoping? The difference in conversion is massive.
Also, what's your plan for the inevitable "cool product but not for me" comments on PH? Having a response ready for common objections saves you on launch day.
Good luck with the launch. Rooting for you.
On PH engagement started doing that this week, not waiting until the 13th. You're right that parachute launches are visible from a mile away. On warm outreach it's the only outreach I'm doing. Every founder I've had a real conversation with in the last three days is someone I'll message directly on launch day. No blasts, no cold lists. On the objection responses that's the gap in my plan you just identified. Haven't prepared those yet. What objections did you get that you wish you'd had a response ready for?
Mainly pricing objections and "we already have [competitor]" responses.
For pricing: I learned to lead with the problem/cost of NOT solving it before mentioning price. "You're losing X hours/month on manual tracking" hits harder than "$97 for automation."
For competitor objections: Instead of defending why I'm better, I ask "What's missing in your current setup?" Sometimes they realize their solution sucks, sometimes they're actually happy with it. Either way, saves time.
The objection I wish I'd prepped for: "This looks interesting but we'll revisit in Q3/Q4." That's a polite no disguised as a maybe. Now I just ask "What would need to be true for you to start TODAY?" Forces them to either commit or admit it's not a priority.
What objections are you expecting for your launch?
The "revisit in Q3" one is the objection I hadn't named but will definitely get. Polite no disguised as a maybe is exactly right and "what would need to be true to start today" is the cleanest way to cut through it I've heard. For ReleaseLog the objections I'm expecting are "I just use a Notion page for this" and "my users don't really need updates." Both are the same objection underneath they haven't connected silent users to churn yet. The problem isn't that they disagree with the solution, it's that they don't feel the problem. Leading with the cost of not solving it is the right frame for that.
This is exactly the playbook I'm following for my own PH launch with WeProcess (visual thinking platform — whiteboard × kanban × mind map). Solo founder, near-zero audience, building in public from Tokyo.
The line that hit hardest: "no new features until 5 paying customers." I've been wrestling with whether to delay launch for one more feature. You're right — distribution is always the real problem, and building feels like progress when it's actually procrastination.
Question: How are you balancing the "show up daily on IH" with actual development time? I find myself either deep in code or deep in conversations, never both well.
Will be watching May 13th 🚀
The balance is simpler than it sounds because I've taken the feature building off the table entirely until I hit 5 paying customers. That decision removed the conflict. Right now the only two jobs are distribution and keeping the product stable. IH gets the first hour of the day before I open anything else. Once that's done, whatever's left is maintenance. Removing the option to build new features forced the prioritization. Don't delay for one more feature WeProcess sounds like something people can use today. What's the Tokyo indie scene like, is there much of a community there?
"Remove the option" is the part that landed. Keeping the feature door open was giving me an out — closing it forces the actual work. The WeProcess nudge is taken too; "one more feature" is exactly the instinct I'm trying to disarm.
Tokyo indie scene: real but quiet. Most Japanese indie devs live in Japanese-only communities (note, Zenn) — that's where I've been writing too, in Japanese. IH is new territory for me; honestly part of why I'm here is to figure out how the English-speaking indie world actually works.
Rooting for the 13th. 🤝
The quiet but real description of Tokyo's indie scene is interesting Japanese-only communities means a whole parallel ecosystem most of us never see. The fact that you're here figuring out how the English-speaking side works while building something genuinely useful puts you ahead of most people who show up on IH already fluent in the culture. That's a harder starting point. See you on the 13th and tag me when WeProcess launches.
This hits. No ad budget, no real following, just something I'm still building and actually believe in, that's most of us honestly. Paid distribution was never really on the table anyway, so showing up and being useful isn't just the better play it's the only play.
Exactly that. When paid isn’t an option the question stops being “what’s the best channel” and becomes “where can I actually be useful.” Removes a lot of noise. What are you building?
This resonates with me on such a deep level. I’m currently in the same 'pre-launch grind' for Triply, and I’ve embraced the exact same philosophy.
I’m building this at 50, learning to code from scratch on a Chromebook, while working 8-hour warehouse shifts. Like you, I realized that 'polished' stories are boring—people connect with the struggle and the real human behind the screen.
I love your rule of 'no new features until 5 paying customers.' It’s so easy to hide behind code instead of doing the hard work of distribution. I'm also spending my time here on IH just being useful and building those 'warm' relationships for launch day.
Let’s definitely swap notes. The 'unpolished' way is the only way to build something that actually lasts. Good luck for May 13th!
Building at 50, on a Chromebook, between warehouse shifts, that’s not a backstory, that’s the whole argument against every excuse the rest of us use. The hiding behind code point is exactly right, it’s comfortable because it feels productive and nobody can tell you you’re wrong until the customers don’t show up. What’s Triply? And when’s your launch date?
Thank you! That means a lot. Honestly, the Chromebook and the warehouse shifts are my 'fuel' now—they keep me focused on what really matters.
What is Triply?
It’s an AI-powered travel ecosystem designed to remove the 'planning friction.'
Triply: Generates precise itineraries, flights, hotels and activities.
The Launch:
I’m currently battling the 'Amadeus Production Key' final boss, but I’m aiming for this Friday ( if I have the courage haha). I want to make sure the backend is rock solid for the first wave of users.
Travel planning friction is a real problem and the Amadeus integration is exactly the kind of backend work that's invisible to users but makes or breaks the whole thing. Don't let the production key be the reason Friday doesn't happen if the core flow works, ship it. The first wave of users will tell you more about what's broken than another week of testing ever could. You've already beaten harder things than an API key. What does the itinerary generation actually look like does it build day by day or does it optimize the whole trip at once?
This is the approach. Genuinely.
Most pre-launch posts read like a press release written to a person who doesn't exist yet. This one reads like someone who's actually thought about what the next 12 days look like on a Tuesday morning.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is the one I'd frame on a wall. It's so easy to convince yourself that the reason nobody's paying is because the product needs one more thing. It almost never is. Distribution is almost always the actual problem and building more features is just a more comfortable way to avoid that conversation.
The IH approach you're describing works too, but it's slow and most people give up on it after 3 days when it doesn't produce immediate results. The fact that you're setting a 12-day horizon instead of expecting overnight results tells me you actually understand how this works.
One thing I'd add — the founders you help in threads before May 13th, follow up with them directly the day before launch. Not a mass message. Individual ones. "Hey we talked last week about X, we're going live tomorrow, would mean a lot if you checked it out." That personal touch on launch day is worth more than any amount of upvotes from strangers.
Good luck. Drop an update after launch day genuinely curious how it goes.
That pre-launch follow-up advice is going straight into the plan. Individual messages, reference the actual conversation, the day before not a blast, not a template. That’s the difference between a reminder and a request and you’re right that it’s worth more than cold upvotes. The 3-day dropout point is real too most people mistake slow for not working. Appreciate you taking the time to write this properly. Will drop an update after the 13th.
Hey, checked your product — nice concept.
One thing I noticed is you’re not leveraging SEO content yet.
A few targeted blog posts could help bring consistent traffic.
I help SaaS startups and Digital Marketing companies grow with SEO and conversion-focused content that turns traffic into leads.
Solid plan. Three sharp things from running TokRepo's PH launch (skill marketplace for AI agents) that aren't in most "no-customers PH playbook" posts:
The minute-zero rule is real and brutal. PH's algorithm front-loads the first 90 minutes — if you don't hit ~30 upvotes in that window, the curve flattens and you're invisible. Pre-warming via IH/Twitter is right but not enough. Build a Notion shared "launch warriors" list 7 days before — 25-30 founders who commit specifically to upvoting at 12:01 AM PT. Asking 80 people gets you ~25 reliable ones. We tracked: 23/30 committed → showed up. Saved our launch.
"No new features until 5 paying customers" is the right rule, but flip it: in those 12 days, ship 3-5 content artifacts instead. A teardown of why competitor X's onboarding fails. A short loom of you using ReleaseLog yourself for a real release. A spreadsheet of "what 50 founders say is broken about changelogs." Each artifact = a reason to send DMs that feel like value, not pitch. Got us 47 cold conversations in 9 days pre-launch with 0 marketing budget.
The "be useful in threads" strategy works only if you treat it as data collection, not just goodwill. Track every founder you talk to in a sheet: their stack, their stage, what they care about. On launch day you don't blast — you DM each one individually with one line tied to what they told you. Reply rate goes from ~6% (cold) to 41% (contextual). 7 of our first 12 PH-day signups came from this.
Re: PH ranking — agree, top 5 is the realistic target with your prep level, not #1. #1 needs a hunter with 10K+ followers OR a paid PH agency. #5 needs ~120 quality upvotes + 25 substantive comments in first 4 hours. Doable solo.
DM me your launch day if you want a non-friend upvote and a real comment. May 13.
The launch warriors list is the thing I hadn’t accounted for. I’ve been thinking about warm relationships as a passive asset people who know my name and might show up. You’re describing an active commitment list, which is a completely different mechanic. 25 confirmed people at minute zero beats 200 who might get around to it. Building that starting today. Taking you up on May 13th, I’ll send you the link that morning. What’s TokRepo at now post-launch?
Respect for the "zero customers, two Twitter followers, May 13th" honesty — most pre-launch posts hide the starting line. I'm a solo dev shipping a small iOS memo app this year and the only thing that actually moved my early signups was exactly what you described: showing up in 1–2 communities every day and being useful before mentioning anything I built. The funny part — my single most productive hour was answering a totally unrelated Reddit question for someone who later DM'd me asking what I was working on. One thing I'd add for May 13th specifically: warm up your replies-to-other-people ratio in the 48 hours before, not just on the day. How are you tracking which IH conversations actually convert into launch-day support — gut feel, or something more structured?
The unrelated Reddit question leading to a DM is the best illustration of why useful-first works you weren't in the room as a founder, you were just a person who helped. That's the version of yourself people actually want to follow up with. On tracking which conversations convert honest answer is it's mostly structured gut feel right now. I keep a mental note of who I've had real back and forth with vs who left a one-line comment. The 48 hour warm-up ratio point is something I hadn't thought about specifically noted and going into the plan. What's the memo app?
The show up and be useful first strategy is underrated. Most pre-launch content is thinly veiled self-promotion people can feel it immediately and it does the opposite of what you want. What you're describing is actually how real relationships get built. The founders who know your name on launch day are worth 10x the ones who just stumble onto your listing cold. Good luck on the 13th
Appreciate it. “Thinly veiled self-promotion people can feel immediately” is exactly the trap and most people don’t realize they’ve fallen into it until the comments stop coming. What are yiu working on?
This feels like the honest version people actually need.
The part that stands out is treating relationship-building as the real launch prep, not the listing itself. A lot of founders treat launch day like the start of distribution when it’s really more like the test of whether any distribution groundwork exists at all.
That last line is exactly it. Launch day doesn’t create distribution it reveals whether any existed before it. Most people find out the hard way. The listing is just the moment of truth, not the work itself.
Solid plan. Launching on Product Hunt with zero audience is tough, but focusing on real relationships first is exactly what most people skip.
I did something similar with my last product. Showed up consistently in relevant threads, helped where I could, and after a few weeks I already had warm leads before launch day. Conversion from those conversations was way higher than cold PH traffic.
Biggest thing: don't push your product in every comment. People smell it immediately and you lose trust.
Good luck on May 13th. I'll be watching how it goes.
The conversion gap between warm conversations and cold PH traffic is the number I keep coming back to. Nobody talks about it because cold traffic is easier to measure but harder to convert, and warm relationships are the opposite. Don’t push in every comment is the rule I’ve been most careful about you only get to break it once before the trust is gone. What was the product?
Sounds like a good idea. i might just actually use it for an app I'm building.
Just one thing I'd toss out there. When I clicked your link it took me to the Request a Feature page. It took me a while (in Internet terms, obvs) to page back and forward figure out what your product does. I found it and it was a compelling description for founders who need it, or like me, founders who hadn't about it but realised that it could be really useful. Anyway, why don't you add an 'about' to your menu and add that description to it?
I agree with this comment. You might want to put an interactive demo of your platform on your homepage so that people get an instant idea of what you do. Use Supademo (shameless plug)
Fair point and noted an interactive demo on the homepage would close the gap faster than any amount of copy. Will look at Supademo. Is that what you built?
That’s exactly the kind of feedback I needed, thank you for actually clicking through and spending time on it. You’re right, landing on the feature request page first without context is confusing. An about page with a proper description is going on the roadmap today. Glad the product clicked once you found it though. If you ever have more questions please feel free to reach out about them, I’ll be around! What are you building?
It's called The Insight Engine, thanks for asking. Learns your B2B consultancy niche once, then delivers research-backed newsletter drafts and LinkedIn posts every Monday morning—in your voice, not AI's. No re-prompting. No context loss.
“In your voice, not AI's” is doing a lot of work in that description and in the right way that's the objection every AI content tool has to answer before anything else. The Monday morning delivery without re-prompting is the part that makes it feel like a service rather than a tool. For B2B consultants who hate the blank page but also hate sounding like ChatGPT, that's a real unlock. How are you training it on someone's voice is it examples they provide upfront or does it learn from corrections over time?
This is refreshingly honest. Most pre-launch posts are polished success stories. You're sharing the messy reality.
I've built TrendyRevenue (AI idea validation – live, launched recently on PH too). Did it with zero customers as well. Your approach of 'showing up on IH every day to be genuinely useful' – that's exactly what worked for me too. Those relationships paid off on launch day.
Question: You said 'no new features until 5 paying customers.' What's your testing process for bugs or edge cases before then? I'm struggling with balancing 'ship fast' vs 'don't ship broken.' Any lightweight QA strategy you're using? Also, the public roadmap/feature board – smart. I might steal that. How did you decide which features to put on there vs keep internal?
Good luck on May 13th. Following.
On bugs vs ship fast the rule I use is: does this break the core loop? Changelog publish, roadmap update, feature request submission. If those work, ship it. Edge cases in secondary features get noted and fixed in the next update. Perfect is the enemy of first customer. On the roadmap anything that’s genuinely planned goes public, anything that’s a maybe or a strategic decision stays internal. Users voting on real options is useful signal. Users voting on things you’re not sure about yet just creates expectation debt. That’s actually built into ReleaseLog itself — the public page at https://tryreleaselog.com/p/releaselog-building-in-public is live if you want to see how I’m using it. Good luck with TrendyRevenue, how did launch day actually go?
Solid framework – 'does this break the core loop?' That's clean. I'm stealing that. You're right, perfect is the enemy of first customer. I've been stuck polishing secondary features nobody asked for.
On launch day: honestly, it was underwhelming. Got some upvotes, a few free signups, zero conversions. But the relationships I built before launch (like you said) kept me motivated. Those people showed up, upvoted, and gave feedback. That mattered more than the number.
Your point about expectation debt on roadmap – noted. I'll keep maybe-items internal.
Thanks for the advice. Following your PH journey. Let me know how May 13th goes
Underwhelming numbers, relationships showed up that's actually the best possible outcome to learn from before May 13th. The upvotes from people who knew you mattered more than the ones who didn't, which is the whole argument for everything I'm doing right now made concrete. Appreciate you sharing the real version. Will drop the launch link here on the 13th.
ok go on.. all the best
Rooting for you.
I've been wandering around — IH, Reddit, X — trying to find early users for Mystic Sage, an AI counseling app I built. No deadline. Just waiting for people to show up somehow.
Reading this made me realize what I was missing. It's about setting a deadline and then showing up every day with genuine sincerity for the people you meet along the way.
Twelve days. I'll be watching.
Rooting for you too, man. The wandering phase is brutal — feels like shouting into the void. Setting a deadline changed everything for me too. Suddenly every conversation matters.
Quick thought on Mystic Sage: AI counseling is a sensitive space. Trust is everything. Before you go deep, maybe run it through TrendyRevenue's free tier (one analysis, no card). See what the market demand looks like, who the competitors are, and where the gaps sit. It's saved me from building in dead ends more than once.
If the data looks solid? Then those 12 days of sincere conversations will hit different.
Following your journey. Keep showing up.
Yeah the deadline isn't magic, it's just a forcing function that turns passive presence into active showing up. Pick a date, any date, and let it pull you forward. Mystic Sage sounds like a product where trust is everything, the founders who find early users for something that personal are usually the ones who went one conversation at a time rather than one channel at a time. Twelve days. I'll keep you posted.
the no new features until 5 paying customers rule is doing a lot of work here. the hardest part of that constraint is that building feels like progress even when it is not solving the actual problem. distribution is invisible until it suddenly is not, which makes it easy to default back to the thing that gives you feedback loops. twelve days of showing up in real conversations compounds faster than most founders expect. what counts as a win for you on day 14, regardless of where you land on the leaderboard?
Honestly, at least one person who signs up on launch day and says they'd been following along. Not a cold click from the Product Hunt feed someone who knew my name before they saw the listing. That's the difference between a spike and the start of something. What are you building?
a beauty product inventory and expiry tracker for iOS. the same problem you're solving on the distribution side is exactly where i am right now. launch is coming up and the temptation to keep building features instead of having real conversations is constant. seeing someone else draw that line clearly and hold it is genuinely useful 🙌
Beauty product inventory and expiry tracker is a specific enough problem that the people who need it really need it that kind of clarity makes the conversation work easier than broad tools. The line gets easier to hold the more conversations you have, because every real exchange is proof that distribution is the actual job right now. Good luck with the launch, drop the date here when you have it.
The "no new features until 5 paying customers" rule is the one I wish I'd written down last year. I'm a few months into a small iOS side project, and the worst weeks were the ones where I added "one more thing" instead of fixing distribution. The thing your strategy gets right that almost nobody talks about: showing up in IH threads doesn't compound until around week 3-4. Reply 1 might get a polite thanks. Reply 15 is when someone clicks through to your profile because they remember your name from somewhere. People aren't lazy, they're cautious — three encounters with the same useful person feels safer than one. What's your concrete signal for whether a thread reply was "useful enough" vs filler? That's the calibration I'm still bad at.
The week 3-4 observation is the most accurate thing I've read about IH engagement and I haven't seen anyone say it that clearly before. Three encounters with the same useful person feels safer than one that's exactly the mechanic and it reframes the whole early period from "not working" to "still loading." The signal I use for useful vs filler is simple: did I learn something from writing it? If I'm just agreeing or restating what they said, it's filler regardless of how well it reads. If I had to actually think about their situation to write it, it probably added something. The other test is whether I'd want a reply if I don't care either way, the comment wasn't good enough. What's the iOS project?
I think this is the best way to go about it. I haven't picked a date yet but will do something similar.
Do you think PH is the best place to be building relationships? are you working on building socials or anything outside of PH?
IH is the main focus right now because this is genuinely where my customers are indie founders who need to communicate better with their users. X is running in parallel but early, two followers and counting. No other channels yet. The honest answer is I'd rather do one channel properly than spread thin across five and do none of them well. Pick your launch date the relationships you build in the next few weeks matter more than the listing itself. What are you building?
I'm feeling this a lot recently. I've been trying to pick the correct lane, Spread across the 5 channels right now and waiting for one of them to start moving so I can go all in on it. I'm glad to hear IH is working for you. Maybe I need to invest some more time here!
I've been working on a screen recording tool called ShipClip, a mix of screen studio and loom. X has been working alright for me, being able to post video content is pretty useful for my tool. I'll find your account over there!
ShipClip makes sense on X video content for a video tool is a natural fit, that's probably your signal right there. Five channels with one already showing movement isn't a spread problem, it's a permission problem. You're waiting for it to be obvious before you commit. It's already telling you something. See you on X !! I’ll be watching the journey, you know where to come if you ever need a changelog, roadmap, or feature request implementation.
This is exactly the right mindset- relationships before rankings. We're launching StartZig around the same time, same zero-customers starting point and would love to swap notes on what's actually moving the needle for you.
Good timing, let's do it. May 13th is the date for me, when are you targeting for StartZig? The thing that's actually moving the needle so far isn't a tactic, it's just showing up in threads where I genuinely have something to add and letting the conversations develop naturally. No shortcuts but it compounds faster than I expected. What are you building?
Feels like you’re treating the launch less as a spike and more as a checkpoint of existing relationships.
Curious — how are you thinking about converting those conversations into actual momentum on launch day?
Exactly that. The spike is a byproduct if the relationships are real, not the goal itself. The conversion is simple — the people I've been talking to for the past two weeks will get a direct message on launch day saying we're live on Product Hunt, would love your support. No cold ask, no blast to strangers. Just the founders who already know what I'm building and why. The ones who've been in genuine back and forth with me are the ones most likely to show up. That's the whole play.
That makes sense.
Feels like the key is that the “ask” doesn’t feel like an ask because the relationship already exists.
At that point it’s more of a reminder than a request.
Exactly. A request from a stranger is friction. A reminder to someone who already knows you is just timing. The whole pre-launch period is just building enough of those relationships that launch day has somewhere to land.
Are you working on anything / have a launch coming up?
Struggling to run ads in restricted niches? Or need leads on your crypto, Forex recovery, IGaming, Gambling, Dating etc
I provide:
• Agency ad accounts (Google, FB, TikTok, Taboola,Bing)
• Clean cloaking & whitepage setup
• High-converting creatives
• Full campaign deployment
"The 'no new features until 5 paying customers' rule is the hardest discipline to keep but probably the most important one. I'm in the same pre-launch grind right now — validating a client vetting tool for freelancers, zero users, just started having real conversations this week. The part about showing up genuinely before asking for anything is exactly what I'm learning. What's been the most surprising thing about building in public so far — has anyone pushed back on the idea itself or has the feedback been mostly positive?"
This comment was deleted a day ago.
This comment was deleted a day ago.
This comment was deleted 3 days ago.