Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Short-term (< 3 months)
Last year, a potential client approached me with what seemed like a dream project: build a complex two-sided marketplace platform with a substantial budget. The technical challenge was exciting, and it would have been one of my biggest projects to date.
I said no.
Not because the money wasn't good or the project wasn't interesting, but because they had the fundamental approach completely backwards. They wanted to spend months building a full platform to test if their idea had market demand. Sound familiar?
This experience taught me why no-code prototyping isn't just faster—it's strategically smarter. While everyone's rushing to build "MVPs" that take months and cost thousands, the real winners are validating concepts in days, not quarters.
Here's what you'll learn from my contrarian approach to prototyping:
Why I turn down big development projects in favor of rapid validation
The framework I use to build functional prototypes in 1-3 days
How to validate demand before writing a single line of code
Real examples of AI-powered prototypes that outperformed traditional builds
When no-code prototyping fails (and what to do instead)
If you've been stuck in the "perfect product" trap or burning budget on premature development, this playbook will show you a better way. SaaS founders especially need to read this.
Conventional Wisdom
What the development world preaches
The traditional software development world has convinced everyone that building software requires months of planning, complex architecture, and significant upfront investment. Here's what every startup founder has been told:
The Standard Development Playbook:
Write detailed specifications - Spend weeks documenting every feature and edge case
Choose your tech stack - Debate React vs Vue, PostgreSQL vs MongoDB for weeks
Set up development infrastructure - CI/CD pipelines, staging environments, monitoring
Build your MVP - Which somehow takes 3-6 months and $50K+
Launch and iterate - Only to discover users don't want what you built
This approach exists because the software industry has been dominated by engineers who think in terms of scalability and perfect architecture. Development agencies love this model because it justifies big budgets and long timelines.
The problem? Most startups die not from technical limitations, but from building something nobody wants. The traditional approach optimizes for the wrong thing—technical perfection instead of market validation.
Even the "lean startup" movement got co-opted. What started as "build small, learn fast" became "build a smaller version of your big idea." The real breakthrough insight gets lost: your first product should validate demand, not deliver features.
The conventional wisdom falls short because it assumes you know what to build. But in reality, the market will tell you what to build—if you listen quickly enough.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
When that marketplace client came to me, they had all the classic warning signs. No existing audience, no validated customer base, no proof of demand—just enthusiasm and a substantial budget.
Their pitch was textbook startup optimism: "We want to build a platform that connects X with Y. We think there's huge demand, and we're willing to invest significantly to find out."
The Red Flag Statement: "We want to see if our idea is worth pursuing."
This is where most developers would have jumped at the opportunity. Big budget, interesting technical challenge, months of guaranteed work. But I'd learned this lesson the hard way from previous projects.
My Previous "Success" Story: Two years earlier, I'd built a beautiful, complex platform for a client. Perfect architecture, smooth user experience, impressive technical implementation. The client loved the demo. The platform launched to... crickets. They'd spent six months and $75K building something their market didn't want.
That failure taught me a crucial lesson: If you're truly testing market demand, your validation shouldn't take three months—it should take three days.
So when the marketplace client presented their "test our idea" project, I knew they had the sequence backwards. They wanted to build first, then validate. I recommended the opposite.
What I Told Them: "If you're genuinely testing demand, your MVP should be a process, not a product. Let's validate the concept manually before we build anything."
They weren't interested in my approach. They wanted the comfort of a big, impressive platform. They found another developer who was happy to take their money and build their vision.
Six months later, their expensive platform was a ghost town. Meanwhile, I'd used no-code tools to help three other clients validate (and pivot) their concepts in the same timeframe.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
After turning down that marketplace project, I developed a systematic approach to no-code prototyping that has consistently outperformed traditional development. Here's the exact framework I use:
The 3-Day Validation Protocol:
Day 1: Concept Validation
Instead of building anything, I create a simple landing page or Notion doc explaining the value proposition. The goal isn't to impress—it's to communicate the core idea clearly enough that potential users can understand and respond to it.
I use tools like Framer or even just a Google Form to capture interest. If I can't get 50 people to express genuine interest in the concept within 24 hours of sharing it, the idea needs work before any building happens.
Day 2: Process Design
This is where most people jump to building features. Instead, I map out how the business would work manually. For that marketplace client, this would have meant:
Manual outreach to potential suppliers
Email/WhatsApp coordination between buyers and sellers
Simple payment processing through existing tools
Google Sheets for tracking and management
Day 3: Rapid Prototyping
Only after validating demand and proving the manual process do I build anything. And when I do build, I use no-code tools strategically:
For AI-Powered Prototypes: I've had great success with platforms that let you integrate AI capabilities without complex development. The key is focusing on the user experience, not the underlying technology.
For Marketplace Concepts: Tools like Airtable + Zapier can create surprisingly sophisticated matching and workflow systems in hours, not months.
For SaaS Ideas: Bubble.io remains excellent for complex logic, while Framer handles simpler concepts beautifully.
The Critical Distinction: I'm not building a "product"—I'm building a validation tool. The prototype should prove the concept works, not win design awards.
My Validation Stack:
Landing Pages: Framer for design-heavy concepts, simple HTML for everything else
User Flow Testing: Bubble.io for complex workflows, Typeform for simple interactions
Data Collection: Airtable for everything, connected via Zapier
Communication: Manual outreach initially, then simple automation
The magic happens when you realize that most "technical" problems are actually process problems. You don't need to build Uber to test if people want ride-sharing in your city. You need to coordinate some drivers and riders manually first.
Validation Speed
Test demand in days, not months. Use landing pages and manual processes before building anything complex.
Process Focus
Map the business workflow manually first. Most technical problems are actually process problems in disguise.
Tool Selection
Choose no-code tools based on complexity needed, not features offered. Framer for simple, Bubble for complex logic.
Pivot Ready
Build prototypes that can evolve quickly. Avoid over-engineering early versions that become hard to change.
The results of this approach have been consistently superior to traditional development:
Speed Advantage: While traditional MVPs take 3-6 months, my no-code prototypes are functional in 1-3 days. This isn't about cutting corners—it's about validating the right things first.
Cost Efficiency: Instead of $50K+ development budgets, validation costs under $500 in tools and time. The marketplace client could have tested 20 different concepts for the price of their failed platform.
Pivot Capability: When you discover what users actually want (which is different from what you think they want), changing a no-code prototype takes hours, not weeks.
Real Success Story: One client used this approach to test an AI-powered content idea. The first version failed completely—users hated the interface. But because it was built in no-code, we pivoted to a completely different approach in two days. The second version got 500 signups in its first week.
The psychological advantage is huge too. When you've invested months and thousands into development, you become attached to your solution. When you've invested days and hundreds, you're willing to kill bad ideas quickly.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
After dozens of no-code prototyping projects, here are the key lessons that separate successful rapid validation from expensive failures:
Lesson #1: Your MVP Should Test Assumptions, Not Deliver Features
Most people build feature lists. Winners test hypotheses. Ask: "What do I need to prove?" not "What do I need to build?"
Lesson #2: Manual Processes Teach You What to Automate
Every successful automation started as a manual process someone got tired of repeating. Do it manually first, then automate the pain points.
Lesson #3: No-Code Tools Are Thinking Tools
The real value isn't avoiding coding—it's forcing you to think clearly about user flows and business logic before getting lost in technical implementation.
Lesson #4: Distribution Beats Features
A simple prototype with good distribution consistently outperforms a complex product with no audience. Focus on reaching people, not impressing them.
Lesson #5: Constraints Breed Creativity
No-code limitations force you to find simpler solutions. Usually, simpler is better for users too.
When This Approach Fails: If you already have validated demand and need to scale quickly, traditional development might be faster. No-code prototyping is for validation, not scale.
The Meta-Lesson: In today's market, the constraint isn't building—it's knowing what to build and for whom. No-code prototyping optimizes for learning, which is exactly what most startups need more of.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups specifically:
Test core workflows with bubble.io or similar platforms
Validate pricing with simple landing pages before building features
Use manual onboarding to understand user needs before automating
Focus on one core user journey, not comprehensive feature sets
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce applications:
Test product-market fit with simple Shopify stores before custom development
Validate demand with pre-orders and waitlists, not inventory
Use existing marketplaces for initial validation before building your own platform
Prototype complex flows with Typeform + Zapier automations first