We turn away paying users if our evaluation says their startup idea will fail. Here’s why.
Most tools want volume. They take your card on day one, hand you a nice dashboard and don't care if you're gone in three months.
We built Firmgrove the other way around.
Before you can pay us anything, you run your idea through a free evaluation. Score under 70 and the system blocks the upgrade. We won't take your money if we don't think the business works.
Instead you get a breakdown of where the points went missing. Market size, unit economics, no real differentiation, whatever it is. Then a month of free iterations to fix it.
Clear 70 and Firmgrove opens up. From there it runs the company: sales pipeline, runway, fundraising decks, go to market plan, support, legal drafts, weekly execution and more.
You build the dream. Firmgrove runs the company.
Working on something right now? Test it free at app.firmgrove.com and see where you land. Curious what you make of this approach.
Making your own evaluation the gate to becoming a paying customer is a fascinating constraint.
Have you been able to test yet whether the businesses your system scores as stronger actually go on to show stronger real-world traction than the ones it rejects?
Thank you for your question.
No, we haven't validated the score against real-world traction yet. We just started so there's no outcome data to correlate against.
The evaluation isn't a rejection filter, it's a starting judgment. It scores your idea and then tells you what to do next, it doesn't turn founders away.
Or this is what we think. Can you give it a try and tell us what you think please?
That’s helpful context. The distinction between using an evaluation as a rejection mechanism versus a starting point for decisions is an interesting one.
I’d like to continue the conversation outside the thread. What’s the best email to reach you on?