Growth & Strategy

Why I Turned Down a $XX,XXX Platform Project (And What I Told the Client Instead)


Personas

SaaS & Startup

Time to ROI

Short-term (< 3 months)

Last year, a potential client approached me with an exciting opportunity: build a two-sided marketplace platform. The budget was substantial, the technical challenge was interesting, and it would have been one of my biggest projects to date.

I said no.

Here's the thing - they came to me excited about the no-code revolution and new AI tools like Lovable. They'd heard these tools could build anything quickly and cheaply. They weren't wrong about the technical capabilities, but their core statement revealed the fundamental problem: "We want to see if our idea is worth pursuing."

If you're truly testing market demand, your MVP should take one day to build - not three months. This is where most founders get trapped in the "build first, validate later" mindset that kills promising startups before they even start.

In this playbook, you'll learn:

  • Why a lovable MVP isn't about the product at all

  • The one-day validation framework that saves months of development

  • How to build demand before building features

  • The real difference between validation and building

  • When to actually start coding (spoiler: much later than you think)

This approach isn't just theory - it's what I recommend to every client who wants to "test their idea" with a complex build. Let me show you what actually works.

Industry Reality

What every founder believes about MVPs

Walk into any startup accelerator or browse through ProductHunt, and you'll hear the same advice repeated everywhere: "Build an MVP to test your idea." The conventional wisdom sounds logical enough.

Here's what most founders think an MVP should be:

  1. A simplified version of their full vision - Strip out advanced features but keep the core functionality

  2. Quick to build - Use no-code tools to get something live in weeks instead of months

  3. Feature-complete enough to be useful - Users should be able to accomplish their main goal

  4. Professionally presented - Clean design and smooth user experience to make a good first impression

  5. Scalable foundation - Built in a way that allows for future feature additions

This approach exists because it feels productive. Building something tangible gives founders a sense of progress. Investors can see and interact with a product. The team feels like they're making real advancement toward their vision.

The problem? You're optimizing for the wrong thing. Most "MVPs" are actually just feature-light versions of the final product. They require significant time and resources to build properly, and by the time you launch, you're already committed to a specific solution.

Even with modern no-code tools and AI assistance, building a functional platform still takes weeks or months. During that time, you're making hundreds of assumptions about what users want, how they behave, and whether they'll actually pay for your solution.

The real issue isn't technical - it's philosophical. Most founders confuse building with validating, when these should be completely separate phases.

Who am I

Consider me as your business complice.

7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.

When that marketplace client came to me, I recognized the pattern immediately. I'd seen it dozens of times before - smart founders with solid ideas who were about to waste months building something nobody wanted.

Their situation was textbook: they had identified a real problem in their industry, sketched out a compelling solution, and were ready to invest serious money in development. They had:

  • No existing audience

  • No validated customer base

  • No proof of demand

  • Just an idea and enthusiasm

The platform they wanted to build was technically feasible - a two-sided marketplace connecting service providers with businesses. Similar to Upwork but for a specific niche. They'd done market research, identified gaps in existing solutions, and were convinced they had a winner.

But here's what concerned me: when I asked about their validation process, they pointed to their planned product features. When I asked about their first customers, they talked about their go-to-market strategy post-launch. When I asked how they'd test demand, they said they'd know once the platform was live.

This is backwards thinking. They were treating the product as the validation method, when validation should happen before any product exists.

I'd learned this lesson the hard way from previous clients. I'd built beautiful, functional platforms that launched to crickets. Perfect execution of the wrong solution is still wrong.

So instead of taking their money and building what they asked for, I challenged their approach entirely. The conversation that followed became the foundation for what I now call the "lovable MVP" framework - and it has nothing to do with building software.

My experiments

Here's my playbook

What I ended up doing and the results.

Here's what I told that marketplace client, and what I now recommend to every founder who wants to "test their idea" with development:

Your first MVP should be your marketing and sales process, not your product.

Instead of spending months building a platform, I proposed a radically different approach:

Day 1: Create a simple landing page
Not a functional platform - just a clear explanation of the value proposition. One page explaining what problem you solve, for whom, and how people can get started. No complex features, no user accounts, no payment processing.

Week 1: Start manual outreach
Reach out directly to potential users on both sides of the marketplace. Don't pitch a product - pitch a service. "We're manually connecting service providers with businesses. Interested?" This tests demand without requiring any technology.

Week 2-4: Manually match supply and demand
Use email, WhatsApp, or even spreadsheets to connect providers with businesses. Charge for successful matches. This validates that people will actually pay for your solution and reveals how the matching process really works.

Month 2: Only after proving demand, consider automation
Once you've manually facilitated 20-50 successful transactions, you understand the real workflow. Now you can build technology to automate what you know works, rather than guessing what might work.

The key insight: Distribution and validation come before development. If you can't manually create the value your platform promises, automating it won't help.

For that specific client, this meant:

  1. Testing demand first - Could they get businesses to pay for manual matching services?

  2. Understanding the real workflow - What does successful matching actually look like?

  3. Building relationships - Creating a network of providers and customers before building software

  4. Learning the economics - What pricing model actually works for all parties?

This approach flips the traditional MVP model completely. Instead of building to test, you test to build. Instead of hoping people will use your software, you prove they'll pay for your solution first.

Manual Validation

Test demand before building anything - use spreadsheets and personal outreach to validate your core hypothesis

Real Workflow

Understand how your solution actually works in practice through hands-on facilitation

Network Effects

Build relationships with early users who become advocates when you eventually launch technology

Economics First

Prove your pricing model and unit economics work before investing in development infrastructure

The results speak for themselves, though not in the way most founders expect. This approach doesn't generate the typical startup metrics - no user growth charts or feature adoption rates.

Instead, you get something far more valuable: certainty that your solution works before you've invested significant time or money in building it.

In the case of that marketplace client, they discovered something crucial within the first month. The manual matching process revealed that successful connections required much more context and relationship-building than they'd assumed. A simple automated matching algorithm wouldn't have worked.

More importantly, they learned that businesses were willing to pay premium prices for high-quality, personally vetted matches. This insight completely changed their eventual product strategy and pricing model.

The timeline looked like this:

  • Week 1: Landing page live, first outreach campaigns started

  • Week 3: First paid match facilitated manually

  • Month 2: 10+ successful matches, clear understanding of workflow

  • Month 3: Defined pricing model and service process

Most importantly, they had paying customers and proven demand before writing a single line of code. When they eventually did build their platform, they were automating a process they knew worked, not testing whether it might work.

Learnings

What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.

Sharing so you don't make them.

This experience reinforced a principle I now share with every client considering an MVP: In the age of AI and no-code, the constraint isn't building - it's knowing what to build and for whom.

Here are the key lessons from this approach:

  1. Manual processes reveal hidden complexity - What seems simple in theory often involves nuanced decision-making that's hard to automate

  2. Early customers become your product team - People paying for manual services give much better feedback than free trial users

  3. Pricing models emerge naturally - You discover what people will actually pay through real transactions

  4. Distribution is more important than features - Finding customers is harder than building products

  5. Technology should automate proven processes - Build to scale what already works, not to test what might work

  6. Speed to market beats speed to build - You can start serving customers immediately with manual processes

  7. Validation requires real money - People will say they love your idea, but payment is the only honest signal

The biggest mistake I see founders make is treating building and validating as the same activity. They're completely different skills requiring different approaches. Building is about execution; validating is about learning.

A truly lovable MVP is one that people actually want and will pay for - and you can prove that without building anything at all.

How you can adapt this to your Business

My playbook, condensed for your use case.

For your SaaS / Startup

For SaaS startups:

  • Start with manual service delivery before building automation

  • Use spreadsheets and existing tools to validate core workflows

  • Focus on solving one specific problem extremely well

  • Get paying customers before writing code

For your Ecommerce store

For Ecommerce businesses:

  • Test product demand through pre-orders or waitlists

  • Validate pricing through limited manual sales

  • Understand customer acquisition costs before scaling

  • Build supply chain relationships before inventory investment

Get more playbooks like this one in my weekly newsletter