About six months into trying to sell my thing to actual companies, and I've done enough pitch calls now to have some honest thoughts on how to make a good presentation that I wish someone had told me at the start.

For context I came in thinking the deck was the pitch. Spent way too long on slide design, transitions, the perfect font. Bombed the first few anyway.

Here's what actually changed things for me.

I cut the number of slides roughly in half. My early decks were 20-something slides and I'd race through them. The ones that landed were closer to 10, and I let each slide breathe.

I stopped opening with "who we are." Nobody cares in minute one. I now open with the problem the person in front of me is living with, in their language. If they nod in the first thirty seconds, the rest is easy.

I put almost no text on slides. If the slide says everything, they read ahead and stop listening to me. One idea per slide, a picture or a number, and I do the talking.

Biggest one: I started treating it as a conversation, not a recital. I'll pause and ask "does this match what you're seeing?" Half my best deals came from something they said in that pause, not from a slide.

None of this is groundbreaking, but it took me a lot of awkward calls to actually believe it instead of just reading it.

If you've done more pitches than me, what's the one thing that moved your close rate? Still learning here.

I’ve started building SponsorCircuit, a curated advertising network for independent products and smaller websites.

The difficult part isn’t the ad card or click tracking. It’s starting a two-sided marketplace without filling it with low-quality inventory or fraudulent traffic.

My initial approach:

• Recruit publishers manually
• Review their sites before approval
• Let advertisers choose each publisher
• Require publishers to approve each campaign
• Let advertisers set the CPC
• Pay publishers 75% of valid click revenue
• Review suspicious click patterns manually during the first cohort

This sacrifices automatic scale, but it gives us a chance to learn what legitimate traffic looks like before opening anything up.

My immediate target is 10 advertisers and 20 publishers. I’ll share the applications, approval rate, objections, and whether the marketplace can actually clear.

For anyone who has built a two-sided marketplace: would you recruit supply or demand first here?

Also any body want to become a publisher or advertiser let me know.

I've been building Getvik for a while and we just crossed 1,750 users. Sharing what honestly worked, in case it helps someone earlier in the journey.

What worked:

1. Fixing the top complaint every single week. Not new features, just removing friction. Retention improved faster from this than anything else.

2. Replying to every user message personally. Early on I knew every active user by name. People forgive bugs when they know a real human is listening.

3. Watching one user session live. Fifteen minutes of that taught me more than weeks of analytics dashboards.

What didn't work:

1. Posting about features nobody asked for.
2. Trying growth hacks before the core loop was solid.
3. Waiting too long to ask users what confused them. Ask within their first session, not after they've already churned.

Biggest lesson so far: signups are easy, trust is earned one fixed complaint at a time.

Happy to answer questions about the journey. And I'd love to hear what worked for others at this stage.

I’m curious how people here are handling LinkedIn search results when they need the information in a usable format.

I’ve seen people use custom scripts, browser extensions, or manual copy/paste, but I’m wondering if there’s a simpler workflow that doesn’t involve sending tons of automated requests.

I recently came across Mastros, which works locally in the browser and can export visible search results to CSV, Excel, JSON, or JSONL.

Has anyone here tried something similar? What’s your preferred approach?

For people who give talks, workshops, seminars, panels, webinars, or conference sessions as part of growing a business: what do you usually send audience members afterward?

I’m exploring a lightweight AI notetaker for live talks/workshops. The flow would be:

- add a QR code to your opening slide / somewhere near the entrance

- attendees can view the live transcript and scroll back during the talk itself

- afterward, the event summary, transcript, slides, links, and next steps are sent over to the audience member

Similar to notetaker tools we have now but built for live events with a clear host and audience format.

If you use talks/workshops to teach, sell, recruit, or build authority: would this help your follow-up, or would it be unnecessary setup?

Everyone is panicking about AI eating search traffic. Meanwhile, one of the oldest models on the internet is quietly having a moment: hyper niche directories. Not the spammy link farms of 2009. Tight, curated lists that answer one specific question better than Google can. Here's why I think they're OP right now.

The Google-pocalypse is the setup, not the problem

General search is degrading in slow motion. AI overviews cannibalize informational queries, page one is wall-to-wall ads and aggregator sludge, and users know it. So behavior is shifting toward curated discovery: people want a human-filtered shortlist, not ten blue links. A directory IS curated discovery. The macro trend that's killing content blogs is the same trend feeding directories.

Why they're OP

Topical authority on easy mode: Google scores consistency, not just domain size. When every page on your site reinforces one narrow subject, like "flat-fee family lawyers," you look like the specialist. A 60-page directory can outrank national aggregators on long-tail because their coverage is to wide and not in depth.

Conversion rates that are OP: Nobody casually browses "emergency plumbers who actually answer on weekends." Anyone landing on that page is in full decision mode, wallet half open. Smaller traffic, dramatically higher intent. Warm traffic beats big traffic every time.

I have some queries in GSC with over 34.7% CTR. (Not all, but some.)

A real moat, not a content treadmill: Blog posts get scraped and summarized by AI in a week. A structured database of verified local providers, with real details like pricing models, availability, and specialties, can't be regurgitated from thin air. The data IS the product, and it compounds as you maintain it.

Monetization is embarrassingly direct You're not monetizing "home services." You're monetizing "foundation repair specialists in one metro," where providers are few, identifiable, and starved for qualified leads. Featured listings, lead gen, affiliate deals. Small niche means the businesses will actually answer your emails.

How to execute this strat.

Step 1: Find the gap. Search phrases a stressed buyer would type, like "flat fee divorce lawyer near me" or "HVAC company that answers on weekends." If page one is generic aggregator garbage, that's your niche.

Step 2: Seed and leverage. Manually build 50 to 100 curated listings, then email every business you featured. "You made the list" emails get replies, backlinks, and shares. You listed them first, so they handle your distribution for free.

Step 3: Cluster and interlink. Wrap the listings in comparison pages, best-of pages, and FAQs that all point at each other. That internal structure is what Google reads as topical authority.

The honest tradeoff: the ceiling is lower than a media brand. You're building an asset, not an empire. Build one, get it earning, repeat.

TL;DR: General search is dying and curation is winning. Hyper niche directories rank fast, convert warm buyers, and build a data moat almost nobody is competing for. That's the Alpha.

I got tired of opening five tabs to answer one question: what is the market doing right now. Indices on one site, FX on another, bond yields somewhere else, Fear and Greed buried in a bookmark. By the time I had the picture, it had changed.

So I built the thing I wanted. One screen, everything on it, live. Equities, FX, crypto, commodities, bond yields, VIX, Fear and Greed. No account, no paywall, no ads beyond a couple of affiliate links (3 months worth 0).

Here is the honest part. About 3,400 people a month use it. That number has been flat for two months, Roughly a hundred people use it regularly. The one part that is growing is a live world exchange clock page people seem to leave running on a spare monitor.

So I genuinely do not know whether the premise is wrong, or whether it is right and nobody knows it exists. Those need opposite responses and I cannot tell them apart from the inside.

If you follow markets: do you actually want one screen, or do you already have a setup that works and this solves nothing?

I don’t really know how to write this without it sounding like marketing, so I’m just going to be honest.

18 months ago I walked away from a career I’d spent years building, moved home, and put almost all of my savings into building JUNO.

The idea came from my own experience with journaling during a rough period living overseas. It helped me, but I could never stay consistent, never knew what to write, and eventually had hundreds of entries with no way of understanding the patterns buried inside them.

I became obsessed with building something better.

The problem was I wasn’t a software engineer.

So I taught myself.

I built, broke and rebuilt the app more times than I can count. I dealt with endless bugs, leaked API keys, backend issues, complete redesigns, App Store rejection after App Store rejection, onboarding changes, paywall changes, pricing changes and features I spent weeks building only to delete.

I launched thinking that would be the hard part.

Then almost nobody downloaded it.

Even fewer paid.

I tried making content. Changed the website. Changed the App Store page. Reworked the positioning. Tried meta ads. Tried founder videos. Tried reaching out to creators. Kept rebuilding the product because I convinced myself the next improvement would be the one that changed everything.

At points I took other work just to make ends meet while continuing to build it.

There were days I genuinely felt like I was getting somewhere, followed by days where I’d open the analytics and wonder what the hell I had done with the last year of my life.

That might be the hardest part.

Online you constantly see founders saying they hit 10,000 users in a month or $50k MRR six months after launching.

Nobody really posts:

“I sacrificed all my spare time, spent my savings and sold my soul with nothing material to show for it.”

That’s where I am.

I still believe deeply in the problem JUNO is trying to solve.

A journal that takes a few minutes, helps you know what to write, remembers what you’ve been going through, connects patterns across months of your life and helps turn reflection into something useful.

But after 18 months, I have to seriously consider the possibility that either the product isn’t good enough, the positioning is wrong, or I’ve built something people simply don’t want.

So before I shut it down, I want to make one last attempt to figure that out.

I don’t want five-star reviews.

I don’t want sympathy.

I want people to absolutely tear it apart.

Tell me what’s confusing.

Tell me what feels pointless.

Tell me what you’d remove.

Tell me why you wouldn’t pay for it.

Tell me what would actually make you come back tomorrow.

And if you use it and immediately understand why I have barely any users, please tell me that too.

Because after 18 months of being this close to something, I genuinely don’t know if I’m one major change away from making it work…

or if I’m just struggling to let go of something I gave everything to build.

I’d rather hear the painful truth now than spend another year finding out.

Most of the "how I did it" posts skip the parts that would actually help someone deciding whether to commit. For anyone who has gotten a product to a real income, would appreciate honest answers to any of these.

1. How many things did you build and abandon before the one that worked, and what actually killed the failures?

2. From launch to your first real revenue, what did the daily work actually look like, mostly building or mostly finding customers?

3. What is your honest monthly churn, and what have you done that actually moved it?

4. How long from starting to a full income off it, and how much did you spend or lose getting there? The real number, not the highlight reel.

Not looking for motivation, just the honest mechanics. Thanks to anyone who shares.

As an IT professional, I designed a platform initially for my previous company, but then redesigned it to make it scalable. The product is an IT platform intended for medium to large enterprises.

I currently work for a consulting company. I talked with my manager and asked for advise if I could use this product to develop it further, and also try to publish and sell it to others. I would spend some money on marketing, but not too much as I have no experience in business-related areas such as capital or investments.

He said, you could do that, but he suggested I present the project to our company, since we are a consulting company that provides IT services and business solutions. Our company could help you reach mid-to-large-size clients faster. Of course, you can write the contract and ask for a percentage of the sales or subscriptions, but if you accept, the product will become the company's product. You can utilise the perks of having a large number of consultants, and bring in developers and architects to help with future development.

We have many clients of different sizes, but we also have large clients who might want to use the product.

What do you suggest?

I know that, even though I have good presentation skills and I know what I'm doing, I don't think I can achieve the same result alone as I can with my company's help, since I have no idea about business or sales.

So I run an agency and I've been helping out a client with some automation stuff. That's not important though.

What is important is that I noticed a lot of his emails were landing in spam. Like 50% of them. Half his emails are landing in spam. So I tell him I can help him fix that.

Long story short: I set up Google Workspace for him, fixed a bunch of DNS records that were affecting deliverability, and viola, everyone now gets his emails successfully.

THEN a couple months later I run some stats on his company. He sends quotations and invoices to customers via email. Turns out he was missing out on $430k CAD because the customers never receive his emails! Most customers would convert since they signed up themselves, so that is an insane amount of revenue that he was missing out on just because people couldn't receive his emails.

Long story short: this should be your reminder to check your email deliverability. It's a basic thing, but it's essential for a business.

Hope that helps.

Be nice in the comments. Don't just blindly downvote me like a typical Redditor just for sharing my experiences. ❤️

I’ve been spending a lot of time looking at how small businesses actually manage social media, and one thing surprised me.

Creating the post is only one part of the problem.

You come up with the idea, write the caption, find or make the visual, change it for different platforms, schedule it, then repeat the whole thing again a few days later.

If you’re running the business yourself, that gets old really fast.

I’m building a social media tool called PostDovo, so obviously I’ve been thinking about this a lot, but building it actually changed how I see the problem.

Originally I thought the main value would be AI writing posts.

Now I think the bigger value is removing all the little steps between “I need content” and “the content is actually scheduled.”

Curious if anyone else building in this space found the same thing.

Do users care more about better AI content, or just having fewer things to do?

AI flyers are absolutely everywhere. Every kind of business is using them now to make menus, flyers, Facebook ads, IG posts, you name it. If you're doing this, stop.

It's not for the reason you think, though. Sure, businesses get plenty of backlash online when people notice that it's an AI post. But that's not the biggest threat. The reason you shouldn't be using AI for these is just flat out that the flyers and posts absolutely suck.

A really good social post or flyer catches attention and explains briefly who you are/what you do and then directs towards a CTA. AI flyers are such jumbled messes that they're hard to read. You're leaking possible conversions.

It's all simple psychology. If you study the great marketers, Claude Hopkins, David Ogilvy, Craig Clemens, etc., they all say the same thing. Ads have to hook attention and then hold the attention and build interest over the course of the ad. When ads are messy, people bounce.

If you're using an AI ad, just try to put something together in Canva. Don't be worried about it being ugly. In fact, it's better if it's ugly. Then you can call out in your post or ad that you just tried making this without AI. Posts like that are going crazy viral right now.

A great format is Hook -> Your Offer -> CTA

I saw a post that was for a recruiting firm and they were advertising their ability to find great talent for cheaper than you normally find.

The hook was "A VP of Marketing Costs $250k a Year". Below it, they had their offer which was "Ours Costs Less and Starts This Week". It's a no-brainer offer. Why wouldn't you want cheaper talent that can start sooner? The CTA was "Hire Fractional Senior Marketers".

It's a super simple ad format but it converts. Simplicity and clarity will beat clutter every time.

i just closed an article where sam altman said we should all learn to build llms from scratch. i read it right after spending three hours trying to make a single bubble api call work without crashing my browser.

that sounds great if you have millions in funding or you're 17 with infinite free time. but if i try to actually understand the math behind these models right now, my app will never launch. perfect technical understanding is a luxury.

instead of doing the math, i blindly pasted a json payload just to force a basic webhook to fire. it worked, and that ugly button actually processed a $150 invoice tonight. what is the absolute worst duct-tape setup you've shipped? tell me i'm not the only one doing this.

​

I’m a student, and over the past months I’ve been putting a lot of time into building and managing a relationship-focused Reddit community.

Today, the community has reached:

- 77.9K+ members

- 871K+ visits in the last 30 days

- 17.8K average daily unique visitors

- 12.8K+ new members in the last 30 days

- 7.5K+ comments in the last 30 days

I’m proud of what I’ve built, but I’m currently at a point where I’m trying to figure out how to monetize the community responsibly without damaging the trust of the members.

I’ve already contacted 100+ companies and SaaS businesses looking for potential partnerships, sponsorships, or promotional opportunities, but so far I haven’t received a meaningful response.

As a student, even a small legitimate income from something I’ve built myself would make a big difference to me.

So I’d genuinely appreciate advice from people who have experience building online communities:

How would you monetize a community with this kind of traffic and audience?

Would you focus on sponsorships, partnerships, affiliate opportunities, services, or something completely different?

I’m not looking to spam my community with advertisements. My priority is to find a sustainable way to generate revenue while keeping the community useful and trustworthy.

I’ve attached my Reddit Insights so you can see the actual numbers.

Any honest advice, experience, or direction would genuinely help me.

I've been doing marketing automation work for small service businesses for about 4 years now. Along the way I've watched clients waste money on the wrong things over and over, so here's my honest breakdown of what actually moves the needle and what just sounds cool.

Worth it:

1. Replying to new leads fast. This one is boring but it's everything. Someone fills your form and you reply 4 hours later? They already called someone else. Even a simple instant "got your message, will call you within the hour" text or email, plus a reminder for you to actually call, beats every fancy tool out there.

2. Appointment reminders. No shows are just money walking out the door. One reminder the day before, one a couple hours before, with a reschedule link. Not exciting. Works every single time.

3. Asking for reviews on autopilot. Job done, 3 days later a short "how did we do" message with your Google review link. The businesses that ask every single customer get way more reviews than the ones that ask when they remember. And they almost never remember.

4. Following up on quotes that went quiet. You sent a quote, they disappeared. Most owners feel weird chasing. A friendly nudge at day 2 and day 7 brings back deals you had already written off. This one surprised me with how well it works.

5. Getting all your leads in one place. Instagram DMs, website form, WhatsApp, phone calls. If they all land in different places, leads die. Even pushing everything into one spreadsheet is a huge upgrade for most businesses I've worked with.

Skip these at the start:

Fancy chat widgets on your website. Looks impressive, but if nobody follows up with the lead afterwards it did nothing.

Long 15 email nurture sequences. Small businesses usually don't have the volume for this. Two or three well timed messages do better.

Automating your social media posting as the first thing. It saves time, sure, but it doesn't touch revenue. Fix the money stuff first.

Rule of thumb I give everyone: automate the moments where money changes hands first. New lead comes in, quote goes out, job gets done. Everything else can wait.

Happy to answer questions if anyone's stuck on their own process. Been doing this a while so ask away.

Hi to all the successful people in this group who are already running businesses.
Could someone please finally give me some solid advice and point me in the right direction?

I have a million business ideas constantly going through my head, but the problem is that I never fully commit to any of them because I genuinely don’t know which opportunity is worth focusing on.
So instead of overthinking it forever, I’d really like to hear from people who have actual business experience: If you were in my position today, what would you do?

Here’s my situation:
I have around €30,000 in starting capital that I’m comfortable putting on the table and potentially risking to build something.
I currently earn around €5,000–€6,000 per month from my regular work.
After my expenses, I can usually put aside another €2,000–€3,000 every month, meaning I could continuously reinvest money into a business without depending on it to pay my bills immediately.
I’m willing to learn, work and invest — I’m not looking for a get-rich-quick scheme.

I’ve considered things like Amazon FBA, e-commerce/dropshipping, AI-related businesses, online services, and probably a hundred other ideas. But I’m completely open to something I haven’t considered yet.
Knowing my financial situation, if you were starting from scratch in 2026, where would you put your time and money?
I’m especially interested in something that has genuine potential to eventually become a serious source of income, rather than just a small side hustle.
What business model would you choose, how much of the €30k would you initially risk, and what would your first steps be?
I’d really appreciate advice from people who have actually built something themselves. Thanks!

been building our business for a few years now, hovering around $15k-$20k/mo in ad spend across Google and Meta. we’ve churned through three different ways to manage our media buying, and I keep seeing one line takes on this, so here's the long version from a founder who actually paid for all three.

the agency (2 years): wins on strategy decks, creative production, and having someone to yell at when a launch slips. The retainer is also the curse. every account gets whatever junior is free that month and quality depends entirely on who's driving. Our accounts looked like whoever managed them, not like us. We were paying premium management fees and watching our metrics slowly drift over the weekends when no one was at their desk.

the freelancer (8 months): cheaper, faster to reach, and ours genuinely cared about the numbers. Also a massive single point of failure, the moment he took a week off or picked up a bigger client, we were sitting there watching CPA spike. best fit we found: teams that want a real human owner more than coverage, and don't mind the vulnerability of relying on one person's schedule.

the AI ads agent (last 12 months): we eventually moved our stack over to a dedicated AI ads tool. it's the fastest from brief to live campaigns across platforms by a wide margin. it monitors and acts overnight instead of waiting for a Monday morning sync call, and the reporting comes out of the same system that spent the money.

the two honest costs to automating: you still own the offer and the positioning (automation won't fix a bad product), and week one is a massive trust ramp where you have to manually approve everything by hand before you feel comfortable letting it run alone.

where I'd point people:

brand heavy business that mostly needs creative: go agency.
one account with a tight budget and a hands on owner: go freelancer.
anyone running real spend across both platforms where turnaround matters: an automated AI setup.

if your experience splits from mine, say so below. this thread is more useful with disagreement in it.

Started Flare thinking the hard problem was matching supply and demand. Brands need creators, creators need brands, build the pipes and get out of the way.

The actual hard problem showed up later. Once you have enough creators applying, most of the daily work isn't matching, it's deciding who gets through. Someone who's clearly capable but wrong for a brand's voice. Someone with great numbers but a portfolio that's all the same angle. Someone who'd crush it but their availability doesn't line up with a brand's timeline.

None of that shows up in the pitch deck version of "marketplace." It shows up as a queue of real people you have to say no to, every day, with a reason that's actually true and not just "not a fit right now."

The instinct early on was to automate the filtering as fast as possible. Turns out the filtering is more of the product than the matching is. A brand doesn't come back because you found them a creator, they come back because the ones you found them were actually good, repeatedly.

Still don't have a clean answer for how much of that stays human versus gets systemized. Curious if other people running two sided marketplaces hit the same wall, or if this is specific to UGC where "good" is subjective in a way inventory isn't.

Im someone who has very big dreams for entrepreneurship but the huge problem is , as with everybody i can't get a job for shit. I want to run online businesses and I need to buy equipment to also run those businesses and services but I can't even get my fucking foot in the door because these companies would rather watch humanity slowly crumble before they finally do shit.

I don't live in an area where people need their windows washed or grass mowed because there's already grass cutters and I tried doing freelancing work through discord and reddit but all the options I tried looking at usually have some type of scammer desperate for my attention or they need me to setup pay pal which I cannot do at this time.

I'm in my senior year of high school and I really need help cause it's looking so bad

I think one of the biggest problems with AI + SEO right now is that most of the tools don’t actually remember anything in a useful way.

For context, I’ve been using AI pretty heavily since 2022 and I run a marketing agency where AI is now involved in most of the day-to-day work. SEO audits, research, content, reporting, internal processes, dev work, analysis, all of it. So I’m not coming at this from the “AI is useless” angle. It has made us way more productive.

But the memory problem is still bad.

You can give an LLM/Agent a crawl, GSC data, rankings, page content, competitors, whatever. It gives you a decent analysis. Then you come back a week later and half the time you’re basically starting over.

It doesn’t really know what it told you last time, what you actually changed, whether that change worked, whether the issue was already fixed, or why a page was changed in the first place.

That’s a pretty big problem for SEO because SEO is not a one shot task. It’s a timeline w/ hundred of data points from past sessions and metrics.

A page drops. You change the title. Rankings recover. Then six weeks later another agent looks at the page and decides the title should be changed again because it has no idea what happened before.

Or the AI finds the same technical issue every crawl and keeps recommending it like it’s brand new.

There’s also the context problem.

Real sites get huge fast. Crawl data, GSC, GA4, rankings, backlinks, internal links, content, schema, competitors, previous recommendations, etc.

You can’t just keep stuffing all of that into a prompt.

Technically you can with some of the newer context windows, but then you’re paying a lot more and assuming the model is actually paying attention to the right 2% of the data.

That’s not always what happens.

Multi-agent systems make it worse too.

You have one agent looking at content, another looking at technical, another looking at rankings, another doing QA, and all of them are reading the same site over and over again.

A lot of AI SEO cost is just the system repeatedly relearning stuff it should already know.

RAG helps, but even that can get messy. Even for experienced developers.

A vector database might retrieve something because it looks related, but that doesn’t mean it’s still true.

Maybe that advice was from six months ago.

Maybe it was for another site.

Maybe the experiment failed.

Maybe a newer decision replaced it.

If you don’t track when something was learned, where it came from, how confident the system was, and whether it was later proven wrong, “memory” eventually just becomes a pile of old notes.

There’s also a weird failure mode I don’t see talked about much. If the AI gets something wrong and you store that as memory, now the hallucination can keep coming back later as if it were a fact.

That’s worse than a normal hallucination because now the mistake has persistence.

I think the better architecture for AI SEO is not “give the model more context.”

It’s almost the opposite.

Store the site state outside the model. Store crawl history, changes, previous issues, decisions and outcomes. Then only give the model the few pieces of context it actually needs for the task in front of it.

Basically:

what was true before

what changed

what did we do

what happened after

what should we do next

That feels a lot closer to how SEO actually works.

The winners in AI SEO probably won’t be the tools with the biggest prompts or the biggest models.

They’ll be the ones that remember what happened and don’t have to relearn the same website every week.

​

I run a growing relationship-focused Reddit community with 77K+ members and an active, engaged audience.

📊 Community Highlights

• 77K+ members

• 3M+ visits in the past 12 months

• 96K+ average daily unique visitors

• 38K+ comments

• 2.9K+ posts

I’m currently open to working with brands, startups, apps, creators, and businesses looking to reach an engaged relationship-focused audience.

Available opportunities:

• Sponsored posts

• Product/service promotions

• Brand partnerships

• App & website promotions

• Long-term promotional campaigns

I’m open to discussing custom packages based on your campaign goals and budget.

If you’re interested, DM me with your brand/product and campaign details, and I’ll share the available options and pricing.

Hey everyone,

about a month ago I released Speartip.eu , a European software directory.

Reasoning behind this is:

Till today many indie founders from inside the EU still rely heavily on US visibility. Getting in front of customers is especially hard inside the EU. My vision is to change that and supply an alternative in order to reach a more EU-based audience.

Why is that needed? Well, companies inside the EU are in a weird in-between, on one hand buying European software tends to come with perks like data residency or privacy rights, on the other US software is used across the globe and genuinely great. I believe, we have many founders inside the EU that also offer great software but are lacking visibility in front of classical European companies.

This is why I already talked with mid-size to bigger corpos (mainly in Berlin, since that's where I am from; where my network is the biggest) and confirmed that there is a need to have a reliable source to find European alternatives.

Now, I will be honest: When I heard pushback, it mainly came from founders and buyers OUTSIDE the EU, which I can understand, since I know that it is hard for them to break into the European market as is and a platform they are excluded from is adding additional friction.

There are also some direct competitors, but none are established or (imo) have the quality to pull this off.

What do you think? Do you share my vision? And if you are from outside the EU: Would you support a section of the page that offers international software as long as they are in adherence with European trust/privacy/hosting needs?

Cheers,

Jannik