The #1 reason indie products die isn't the product. It's finding customers. I built a tool to fix that.
I've been building indie apps for a few years now, and I kept hitting the same wall. I could ship. I could design. I could code. But every time I launched something I would be faced with trying to grow my new product. Which, to be frank, I was terrible at.
I'd paste my app into ChatGPT and ask for a growth strategy. It'd tell me to "try social media," "build an email list," and "consider SEO." Thanks, super helpful. The same advice it gives literally everyone, for every product, in every category.
The marketing and growth pain points are what led me to build a tool that solves this problem. This is a long post, but I think it's worth it if you've ever launched something and felt completely lost on the growth side.
TL;DR: I built GrowthMap, a tool that pulls real data from live APIs (competitor listings, SEO metrics, newsletter, podcast, web research, and more) and turns it into a 14-section growth playbook with action items specific to your product. Not generic AI advice.
The cycle that kills indie products
Here's the cycle I kept seeing, in myself and in most other founders:
- You spend months building something you're proud of.
- You launch it.
- You get a handful of friends and family to download it.
- Crickets.
- You ask for advice and get told to "find your audience" and "build in public."
- You try a few things randomly. Nothing sticks.
- The project slowly dies, not because the product was bad, but because you never found the people who needed it.
Sound familiar? I've lived this cycle multiple times (too many times). The worst part is, every time, I thought the answer was to go build something better. Add more features. Polish the UI. Rewrite the onboarding. But none of that matters if nobody knows you exist. Which, yeah, seems obvious, but it wasn't sinking in to me.
The brutal truth is that most indie products don't fail because they're bad. They fail because their builder doesn't know how to do marketing. And why would they? It's a completely different skill set. Much of the advice online is written by marketers selling courses to other marketers, not by builders trying to reach real users.
The 5 pain points that keep founders stuck
I've noticed the same five walls come up over and over.
1. The cold start problem
You launched. Now what? You have zero users, zero traction, and no plan for what to do Monday morning. The launch day excitement fades fast when you realize that shipping was the starting line, not the finish line. Every founder I know has experienced that sinking feeling of checking analytics 48 hours after launch and seeing single-digit numbers.
2. Generic AI advice is making things worse
This one drives me crazy. You ask ChatGPT for a growth strategy and it gives you a nice-sounding plan that could apply to literally any product on earth. "Try content marketing. Build an email list. Consider SEO. Engage on social media." That's not a strategy.
The problem is that these suggestions aren't wrong, they're just useless without specifics. Which social media platform? What content? Which keywords? What email list hook? Without answers to those questions, you're just throwing darts blindfolded.
3. You're blind to your competitive landscape
Your competitors have hundreds (sometimes thousands) of reviews that reveal exactly what users love, hate, and wish existed. That's a goldmine of positioning intelligence. But who has time to read 2,000 App Store reviews and map out feature gaps?
Here's what most founders don't realize: your competitors' weaknesses are your marketing strategy. If their users are frustrated about three specific things and you do those things well, that's your entire pitch. You don't need to be better at everything. You need to be better at the thing that matters most to the people who are actively looking to switch.
But you can't exploit gaps you don't know about.
4. Outreach overwhelm
There are thousands of newsletters, podcasts, and communities that reach your ideal users. The right 20 could change your trajectory. But identifying which ones? That's a dozen hour research job. And even if you find them, you then need to craft a pitch that's specific enough to get a response. Most founders either skip outreach entirely or send the same generic pitch to everyone and wonder why they get ignored.
5. No actionable plan
This is the big one. Even founders who do some research end up with a vague sense of what they should do but no structured plan for what to do first. Generic strategy documents don't tell you what to do Monday morning. They don't tell you which channel to start with, how much time to spend, or what the actual post or email should say.
Founders don't need more information. They need a specific sequence of actions, with specific timelines, for their specific product.
What I learned the hard way
After cycling through this enough times, a few things became painfully clear to me:
The problem is almost never your product. If you built something that solves a real problem, the issue is distribution. You don't need to build more features. You need to find the people who are already looking for what you made.
Generic advice is worse than no advice. When someone tells you to "try content marketing," they're giving you a category, not a strategy. You need to know which subreddit, which keyword, which newsletter. The specifics are everything.
Your competitors' users are telling you how to win. Every negative review is a positioning opportunity. Every feature complaint is a potential headline. But you have to actually collect and analyze that data, which takes hours of manual work.
The first 1,000 customers don't come from virality. They come from showing up in the right places with the right message for the right people. That's a research problem, not a creativity problem.
The gap isn't motivation. It's information. Founders don't know who their real competitors are (and what users hate about them), which keywords they could actually rank for, which newsletters and podcasts reach their exact audience, or what to do first, second, and third with actual specifics.
I realized that if I could close that information gap, the "what do I do now?" problem mostly solves itself.
So I built the tool I wished existed
That's how GrowthMap started. Not as a product idea, but as a frustration. I wanted a tool that would do the research I didn't have time to do, using real data I couldn't get from a chatbot.
The core insight is simple: the value isn't the AI, it's the real data the AI is operating on.
If you paste your app into ChatGPT, it reads your description and pulls from its training data. It doesn't know your competitors' ratings. It doesn't know which keywords have low difficulty scores in your niche. It doesn't know which podcasts cover your category. It can't know those things because that data changes constantly and lives behind APIs.
GrowthMap collects that data first, then uses AI to synthesize it into strategy. Before AI touches anything, it has already:
- Analyzed your product page and 3-10 real competitor listings with actual ratings, reviews, and pricing
- Queried live SEO APIs for your domain metrics, keyword opportunities with difficulty scores, and competitor keyword data
- Run up to 12 web queries and 8 podcast queries to find real newsletters, podcasts, blogs, and communities in your niche
- Collected review excerpts that reveal what users love and hate about your competitors
Then it turns all of that into a 14-section playbook: competitive analysis, feature gap matrix, SEO intelligence, audience profile, quick wins, channel strategy, social media strategy, a 45-day action plan with tailored AI prompts for every task, 20-40+ real outreach targets with custom pitch prompts, content prompts, a launch day playbook, metrics to track, and copy suggestions grounded in keyword data.
Every recommendation references real data. When your playbook says "Competitor X has 2.3 stars on sync reliability across 340 reviews, lead with reliability," that's not a hallucination. That's real data, collected in real time.
Try it
If you want to check it out: growthmap.dev
There's a real, fully interactive example playbook on the homepage so you can see exactly what you'd get before buying anything. Poke around the sections, look at the data, and see if it's the kind of thing that would help you.
This is not another subscription. No upsells. No tiers. $29, one-time purchase.
A subscription doesn't make sense because the product delivers a one-time artifact (the playbook). Charging monthly for something you use once felt dishonest. There's a 14-day money-back guarantee on every purchase.
But since I built this for this community, I'm offering 50% off for the next week. Use code 50INDIEHACKERS at checkout to get your playbook for $15. That expires in 7 days, then it's back to full price.
Happy to answer any questions in the comments. And if you've got feedback or ideas for what else the playbook should cover, I'm all ears. This is very much a product I'm building in the open, for this community.
Let's go find our first 1,000 customers.
The GrowthMap looks amazing and a great resource. I'm currently seeding pre launch for my app Almost. I'm building in public and I can see that getting real users will be a task. I agree that the one-time fee works best for this offer. Has anyone used it yet for their playbook. I'd love to hear how others feel the information GrowthMap provided is different from other AI chat options.
@Justbroberson If you email me I'll hook you up with a free GrowthMap playbook so you can try for yourself. [email protected]
That’s basically the part I’m curious about too.
The difference probably isn’t “AI vs no AI”, it’s whether the output is grounded in live data and pushed through a more opinionated structure instead of a generic prompt.
I’m actually tempted to try it for that reason. My only hesitation is whether it helps most when the ICP and positioning are already fairly clear, or whether it can still be useful when those are still a bit fuzzy.
I'm tempted to try it as well. I mean, with a one time fee for something that will continue to add value to future projects. It seems like a tool to have in your tool box. If I give it a try, I'll report back here.
Hey @erginmurat, I've made 10 promo codes for a free GrowthMap playbook. Send me an email and I'll give you one. [email protected]
The interesting part here, at least to me, isn’t really “AI for growth.” It’s the sequencing.
If you ask a model directly for a growth strategy, it usually gives you something plausible but generic. Once you force it to work on fresh inputs, competitor signals, keyword data, actual reviews, actual outreach targets, the output can become much more useful.
While building Priowise I ran into a very similar issue on the product strategy side. If you ask AI directly how to prioritize a roadmap, it gives reasonable sounding answers but they drift every time because the inputs are vague. What started working much better was structuring the process first, grounding it in company objectives, product context, and market signals, then letting AI synthesize from there.
So the idea behind GrowthMap makes sense to me.
My main question is where the line is between research compression and actual strategic judgment. Especially when ICP, positioning, or the core wedge are still not very sharp. That’s probably the part that decides whether the output becomes genuinely useful or just a more polished report.
Still, the one-time price and the live example make it tempting to try.
Tbh, landing page is great and problem tackled is on spot/
You don't ask for feedback but I was very close to convert in the first 10 seconds :)
What ultimately prevented you from converting? The price? Would love to hear more!
Using real API data instead of AI hallucinations is the right call. When you ship updates to GrowthMap, how are you communicating them? Manually each time?
I haven't solved that just yet, but likely manual for now.
That's actually what I'm researching, how founders handle that. Mind if I ask you a couple more questions about it?
The distribution vs product skill gap is very real. A lot of builders assume that if the product is good enough, users will somehow appear. In reality those are two completely different problems to solve.
Curious whether the patterns you’re seeing in the data differ much between technical products and more consumer-type apps.
I relate to this a lot. Building the product is often the “comfortable” part for developers, but distribution and growth are where things get really hard.
One thing I’ve noticed is that a lot of founders treat growth like something that happens after the product is finished, when in reality it probably needs to be part of the process from the start. Understanding where your potential users already spend time and how they currently discover solutions seems just as important as building the product itself.
Curious if you found any particular channels or strategies that consistently worked better once you started looking at real data instead of generic advice.
There's a lot of opportunity contributing to the conversation where your users are hanging out online. Lots of tech-focused apps can utilize Reddit because their users hang out in the appropriate subreddits.
Where this gets nuanced is finding the exact places where niche users hang out, or the inverse, creating pages and content so that those niche users can find you instead of you finding them.
Both are covered in GrowthMap
Do you think there's a need for some sort of agentic marketing management and monitoring tool? I.e. once you've got the content (and market data as discovered by your tool), would it be useful to have a single-prompt set and forget tool that goes off and sets up multiple marketing campaigns for you?
I think this is the obvious next step. Here's the research — the why and how — but now I want the tool to take action for me. I would love to build that in to GrowthMap.
Good timing on this — I've seen more people asking for exactly this kind of tool in dev communities lately. What's your plan for standing out from existing alternatives?
I have not found any other tools that solve the problem of growth like GrowthMap does. Many tools have parts of it, but not all as a whole.
Now, that's easy for me to understand because I built it, but I need to find a way to communicate to other people that want a solution to their growth problem and I am actively working on solving that now.
Distribution being the hardest part rings true at every stage.
The counterintuitive thing I keep running into: most "distribution problems" are actually targeting problems. The channel isn't broken - the ICP is too loose. A tight list of 50 people who perfectly fit beats a broad list of 5,000 every time, even with identical messaging. The research step before outreach does more work than the copy.
What's your current approach to deciding which channels are actually worth doubling down on?
The current approach is this: gather as much intelligence as you can for a tool, including the closest competitors, finding out the competitor's weaknesses by scouring their reviews from their own customers, SEO analysis of web data for you plus competitors, tons of web search data on various keywords to see where the conversations are happening, a ton of other parallel tasks, then stitch everything together to find patterns. After that, provide a comprehensive report that gives you a ton of ways to take action. That's what GrowthMap does. It takes 15 minutes to generate a report and it takes so long because it is doing some serious crunching and analysis.
The customer finding problem is real and the insight that it is often the primary cause of death is correct. But the framing of distribution as something a tool can fix is where I would push back slightly.
The reason finding customers is hard is not that founders do not know where to look. Most know the channels in theory. The reason is that getting attention from strangers who did not ask to hear from you requires either existing credibility, consistent presence over time, or a very good reason to pay attention right now.
Tools help with the mechanics - finding emails, automating outreach, tracking engagement. They do not generate the underlying reason for someone to pay attention. That still has to come from genuinely understanding the buyer's specific problem and communicating about it in a way that makes them feel understood rather than targeted.
The founders who solve distribution without an existing audience almost always do it by being so useful and specific in one community that word spreads within it before they ever try to scale. What specific community is your tool targeting first?
That's the beauty of GrowthMap, it approaches it from both sides. One side is to find where your customers hang out online. The other side is creating content so that when those customers are actively looking for a solution, they find you.
GrowthMap looks at tons of data (your tool, your competitors, what the competitor's users are complaining about, tons of specific web searches, etc) then finds the correct channel that is closest, not the other way around.
This is the real problem and it is almost never talked about honestly in building spaces.
The product side gets over-documented because it feels controllable. You can always improve the product. But distribution involves other people who did not agree to be part of your plan, communities with their own norms, algorithms you do not control. It is less comfortable to write about because there is no clean formula.
What I have found working through this myself: the people who solve distribution without an existing audience almost always do it by being genuinely useful in a specific community before they ever mention their product. Not useful in a vague sense but useful in the way that makes someone save your comment to share with their team. That takes time and does not look like marketing.
The tool angle is interesting because there is a whole category of problem there - you can have the right product and the wrong distribution channel, the right channel and the wrong timing, the right timing and the wrong framing. Each failure mode looks similar from the outside.
What pattern are you seeing most often - is it the channel being wrong, or is it the messaging not landing with the right audience?
This resonates a lot. The customer-finding problem is real.
What I've seen work for B2B tools specifically: find the watering holes where your target persona complains about the exact pain your tool solves. Not communities in general - the specific threads where someone is already frustrated and looking for a solution.
The conversion rate from a warm reply (someone already expressing the pain) is 10-20x better than cold outreach or general community posts. The challenge is finding those conversations consistently rather than stumbling across them.
What's the tool you built? Curious about the distribution approach.
Your point about real data vs generic AI advice is the crux of it. The same applies to outbound — the difference between a 2% reply rate and a 10% reply rate usually isn't copy. It's timing.
A company that just raised a round, posted three sales hiring jobs, or moved their leadership team is 4-5x more likely to be in buying mode than one that fits your ICP on paper but has no momentum signals. The problem is, that signal data changes daily and you can't ask a chatbot for it.
The founders who crack distribution do the research work manually first, then let the AI help synthesize — not the other way around. Sounds like that's exactly what GrowthMap is doing.
The challenge with B2B tools is that the people who feel the pain most acutely are rarely the ones with budget authority. The person drowning in manual work knows your tool would help - but the manager approving the purchase sees it as a line item.
The products that break through this usually do one of two things: (1) target a role that controls their own budget (solo founders, consultants, freelancers), or (2) make the ROI case so clear and fast that the user can justify it upward in a one-line Slack message.
Which side of that equation does your pricing model sit on?
This resonates a lot. The customer-finding problem is real.
What I've seen work for B2B tools specifically: find the watering holes where your target persona complains about the exact pain your tool solves. Not communities in general - the specific threads where someone is already frustrated and looking for a solution.
The conversion rate from a warm reply (someone already expressing the pain) is 10-20x better than cold outreach or general community posts. The challenge is finding those conversations consistently rather than stumbling across them.
What's the tool you built? Curious about the distribution approach.
The customer acquisition problem is real, and GrowthMap sounds like a solid way to crack it.
One thing I'd add on the other side of the equation: distribution gets you customers, but there's a quiet leak that often erases part of your progress. About 5-9% of subscription charges fail every month — expired cards, bank declines, insufficient funds. These aren't customers who decided to leave. They still want the product. But without a specific recovery sequence, they just... drop off.
For most indie SaaS, that's 00-900/mo gone per $10K MRR — and it doesn't show up as a distribution failure. It looks like churn, but the fix isn't more marketing.
Distribution problem: get more people in the door. Payment failure problem: stop people falling out the back. Both matter at scale, but founders usually only think about one of them. Built the recovery layer for Stripe: tryrecoverkit.com
That's a great point!
We are looking for someone who can lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars.
We are looking for an investor who can lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars.
We are looking for an investor who can invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding company.
With the 300,000 US dollars you will lend to our holding company, we will develop a multi-functional device that can both heat and cool, also has a cooking function, and provides more efficient cooling and heating than an air conditioner.
With your investment of 300,000 US dollars in our holding company, we will produce a multi-functional device that will attract a great deal of interest from people.
With the device we're developing, people will be able to heat or cool their rooms more effectively, and thanks to its built-in stove feature, they'll be able to cook whatever they want right where they're sitting.
People generally prefer multi-functional devices. The device we will produce will have 3 functions, which will encourage people to buy even more.
The device we will produce will be able to easily heat and cool an area of 45 square meters, and its hob will be able to cook at temperatures up to 900 degrees Celsius.
If you invest in this project, you will also greatly profit.
Additionally, the device we will be making will also have a remote control feature. Thanks to remote control, customers who purchase the device will be able to turn it on and off remotely via the mobile application.
Thanks to the wireless feature of our device, people can turn it on and heat or cool their rooms whenever they want, even when they are not at home.
How will we manufacture the device?
We will have the device manufactured by electronics companies in India, thus reducing labor costs to zero and producing the device more cheaply.
Today, India is a technologically advanced country, and since they produce both inexpensive and robust technological products, we will manufacture in India.
So how will we market our product?
We will produce 2000 units of our product. The production cost, warehousing costs, and taxes for 2000 units will amount to 240,000 US dollars.
We will use the remaining 60,000 US dollars for marketing. By marketing, we will reach a larger audience, which means more sales.
We will sell each of the devices we produce for 3100 US dollars. Because our product is long-lasting and more multifunctional than an air conditioner, people will easily buy it.
Since 2000 units is a small initial quantity, they will all be sold easily. From these 2000 units, we will have earned a total of 6,200,000 US dollars.
By selling our product to electronics retailers and advertising on social media platforms in many countries such as Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, we will increase our audience. An increased audience means more sales.
Our device will take 2 months to produce, and in those 2 months we will have sold 2000 units. On average, we will have earned 6,200,000 US dollars within 5 months.
So what will your earnings be?
You will lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars and you will receive your money back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026.
You will invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding company, and on November 27, 2026, I will return your money to you as 950,000 US dollars.
You will receive your money back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026.
You will receive your 300,000 US dollars invested in our holding company back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026.
We will refund your money on 27/11/2026.
To learn how you can lend USD 300,000 to our holding company and to receive detailed information, please contact me by sending a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number listed below. I will be happy to provide you with full details.
To learn how you can invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding, and to get detailed information, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number below. I will provide you with detailed information.
To get detailed information, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal username below.
To learn how you can increase your money by investing 300,000 US dollars in our holding, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number below.
Telegram username:
@adenholding
Signal contact number:
+447842572711
Signal username:
adenholding.88
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
The finding-customers problem is more specific than it looks. It is not one problem. It is three different problems that get collapsed into one complaint.
Problem 1: you do not know who the buyer is. You built for a vague persona and now you have to figure out which actual humans match it.
Problem 2: you know who the buyer is but cannot reach them at scale without paying a lot of money or burning a lot of time.
Problem 3: you can reach them but your message does not land.
Most tools and advice jump straight to problem 3 (copy, positioning, channels). The one that actually kills most products is problem 1. You are trying to optimize a message for an audience you have not precisely defined yet.
I am building outbound tooling for B2B. I hit problem 1 hard - I was targeting "sales people" which is way too broad. The moment I narrowed it to SDRs at agencies doing outbound for multiple clients (specific pain: high data costs, account-based list building, not mass blasting), everything got cleaner. Problem 2 and 3 became solvable.
AI growth playbooks have a hard time with problem 1 because they need that precision as input to give useful output. If your ICP is still fuzzy, the playbook will be fuzzy too. Worth defining that first before running any tool on it.
Hi everyone! 👋
I'm an indie maker from Delhi, selling my side project SachCheck AI – a simple Hindi fact-checker tool for fake news.
Features:
Tech: Single-file HTML/JS, Vercel deploy, keyword-based simulation (easy to upgrade to real API like Grok/Gemini later)
Metrics: Zero revenue/users yet (early MVP), but strong niche potential in India (fake news is a big problem)
Price: $1,000–$1,500 (₹80,000–₹1.2 lakh) OBO, negotiable
What's included: Full code on request, deploy guide, screenshots
Why selling: Flipping this side project to focus on the next idea
DM me for live demo link, code preview, screenshots, or any questions. Happy to talk!
Thanks!
Pawan
100% agree — distribution is the actual bottleneck. Most products die because builders optimize for product-market fit before distribution-market fit. The two are different problems.
What works: finding one channel where your target user already gathers, and being genuinely useful there before mentioning your product. Commenting on relevant posts, answering questions, adding value. The "finding customers" problem dissolves when you become a known person in the space.
I've been doing this with flompt — a free visual prompt builder I built. Showing up in AI/prompt engineering conversations has driven more traction than any other channel.
A ⭐ on github.com/Nyrok/flompt would mean a lot — solo open-source founder here 🙏