TestForPay — get 12 real testers for Google Play in 24 hours
I just got rejected by Google Play after 14 days with 12 testers.
The email said: "Testers were not engaged."
I had asked friends and family. They installed the app. Then they forgot about it. By day 14, Google saw 12 opt-ins but almost zero usage. Rejected.
That's the problem nobody talks about. The 12-tester rule isn't a headcount. Google wants proof that real people actually used your app.
So I built TestForPay — a marketplace where developers post testing jobs and real Android users get paid €2.30–€2.75 to stay opted in for 14 days. Because testers are compensated, they actually show up, use the app, and send daily check-ins.
Pricing:
• Starter: €28 (12 testers)
• Growth: €48 (15 testers + dropout replacement)
• Pro: €78 (25 testers + analytics)
Most jobs fill within 6 hours.
I'm currently fixing my own app with better tester engagement (daily task lists, not just "install and forget"). Round 2 starts this week.
Built solo from Zambia 🇿🇲 with Next.js, Prisma, Stripe.
Brutal feedback welcome.
Two buyers need Google Play testers, but only one pays. The indie dev needs 20 testers once to hit Google's production requirement (one-time need, $0 budget). The dev agency manages 10 apps and needs 200 testers monthly across all clients (recurring need, $500/mo budget). Your "$0/mo" and "12 testers" framing attracts the indie dev. The agency buyer who would pay for scale and reliability thinks "this is for hobbyists, not professional app development."
Great point. You're right that the current framing attracts indie devs with one-time needs.
I'm starting there because that's literally me — I built this after failing the 12-tester rule twice with my own app. I can't sell to agencies until I've proven the model works at small scale.
That said, you're spot on about the agency angle. The real money is in dev shops managing 10+ apps. Once I have 3-5 indie jobs completed and the daily mission system proven, I'll add team billing, bulk tester pools, and an API for agencies.
For now, honest question: would a "Team" plan at €199/mo for unlimited jobs + priority tester allocation feel professional enough for a small agency? Or is that still hobbyist territory?
You’re thinking about it the right way — proving it at small scale first makes sense.
On pricing/positioning: €199/mo isn’t the issue — it’s the perception.
Agencies don’t buy “unlimited testers,” they buy reliability + predictability across multiple client launches. If it still feels like a pool of random testers, it reads hobbyist regardless of price.
Even early, you could frame it more like: “we handle Play Store testing compliance across all your client apps” vs “get testers.” That alone moves you upmarket.
If you want, I can share how I’d position this so agencies take it seriously before you even add those features 👍
Yes — please share. That's exactly the blind spot I have right now.
"Handle Play Store testing compliance" vs "get testers" is a massive reframe. I can see how the latter sounds like a gig economy task while the former sounds like a service layer agencies already pay for.
My constraint: I need to prove the model with 3-5 indie jobs first (my own app is in round 2 right now). But I'd rather build toward the right positioning from day 1 than rebrand later.
What's the exact positioning you'd use on the landing page if you were launching this today?
The rejection makes this much more interesting than just solving the 12-tester headcount.
Have any apps using TestForPay completed the 14 days and actually passed Google's review yet, or is this next round the first real test of whether the engagement model works?
Brutal but fair question. The honest answer: no.
My own app (Invoice Maker) is the first real test. I got rejected after 14 days with 12 friends/family testers — that's the screenshot in the post. "Testers were not engaged."
Round 2 starts this week with:
15 paid testers (not friends)
Specific daily missions (not "just use it")
One app update mid-test based on feedback
I'll report back in 14 days with the result — pass or fail. If it fails again, I'll post exactly what went wrong and iterate.
This is either going to work or become a very public case study in what doesn't. Either way, the data will be real.
Appreciate the transparency. I’d like to continue this properly rather than add another long exchange here.
What’s the best email to reach you on?
Sent you a direct message with the right contact details. Looking forward to chatting.