Growth & Strategy
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 Bubble and Lovable. They'd heard these tools could build anything quickly and cheaply. They weren't wrong - technically, you can build a complex platform with these tools.
But their core statement revealed the problem: "We want to see if our idea is worth pursuing." They had no existing audience, no validated customer base, no proof of demand. Just an idea and enthusiasm.
This experience taught me the fundamental difference between prototypes and MVPs - and why most founders get this completely wrong. In this playbook, you'll learn:
Why your MVP should take one day to build, not three months
The critical difference between testing an idea vs testing market demand
When to prototype and when to go straight to manual validation
A practical framework to determine what to build first
Why AI tools changed the game (but not how you think)
Industry Reality
What every startup founder thinks they know
Walk into any startup accelerator or browse ProductHunt, and you'll hear the same advice repeated like gospel:
Build fast, fail fast - Get your MVP to market as quickly as possible
Prototype first - Create wireframes and clickable prototypes to test user flows
MVP = Minimum Viable Product - The smallest version of your product that users will pay for
Use no-code tools - Leverage platforms like Bubble, Webflow, or Airtable to build without developers
Test with real users - Get your product in front of people and gather feedback
This conventional wisdom exists because it sounds logical. Build something small, test it, iterate based on feedback. The lean startup methodology has been drilled into every founder's head since Eric Ries popularized it.
But here's where this framework breaks down in practice: most founders confuse testing their product with testing their market. They spend months building an "MVP" to validate demand that they could have validated in days without building anything.
The result? I've seen countless startups burn through runway building sophisticated prototypes and "minimum" viable products that nobody wanted. They had great user experiences, clean code, and impressive demos. They also had zero customers.
The issue isn't the tools or the methodology - it's the fundamental misunderstanding of what you're actually testing. Are you testing if your product works, or if anyone wants it?
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
When this marketplace client came to me, they had done their homework. They'd researched the market, identified a gap, and even had preliminary conversations with potential users. On paper, everything looked promising.
But as I dug deeper into their plan, red flags started appearing everywhere. They wanted to build a complex two-sided platform with user profiles, messaging systems, payment processing, rating systems, and advanced search functionality. Their timeline? Three months to launch their "MVP."
The first red flag: They had no existing relationship with either side of their marketplace. No email list, no social following, no network of potential early adopters. They were essentially betting their entire runway on the assumption that "if you build it, they will come."
The second red flag: When I asked about their validation process, they showed me surveys and interviews. Surveys are useful, but they're not the same as people opening their wallets. You can get a thousand people to say they'd use your product; getting ten to actually pay is a different story.
The third red flag: Their definition of "testing" was building the platform and seeing if people signed up. That's not testing - that's gambling with a very expensive bet.
I realized they were confusing a prototype (a tool to test product functionality) with an MVP (a tool to test market demand). They needed market validation, not product validation. Their idea might have been brilliant, but they were solving the wrong problem first.
This is when I made my recommendation that initially shocked them: "If you're truly testing market demand, your MVP should take one day to build - not three months."
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
Instead of building their platform, I walked them through what I call the "True MVP Framework" - a systematic approach to testing market demand before you write a single line of code.
Phase 1: The 24-Hour MVP (Day 1)
I told them to forget about the platform entirely. Instead, create a simple landing page or Notion doc explaining their value proposition. No fancy design, no complex features - just a clear explanation of the problem they're solving and how they plan to solve it.
The goal wasn't to impress anyone with technical prowess. It was to see if their core value proposition resonated with real people who had real problems.
Phase 2: Manual Matchmaking (Week 1)
Next, I recommended they start manual outreach to both sides of their marketplace. Find potential suppliers, find potential buyers, and start making introductions via email or WhatsApp. Charge a small fee for successful matches.
This sounds primitive, but it's exactly how most successful marketplaces started. Airbnb founders manually photographed listings. Uber started with a simple SMS system. The goal is to prove demand exists before you automate the process.
Phase 3: Validated Learning (Weeks 2-4)
During this phase, they'd learn everything they needed to know about their market:
What pricing models actually work
Which features matter most to both sides
What the real friction points are
How much people are willing to pay
Whether the unit economics make sense
Phase 4: Strategic Building (Month 2+)
Only after proving demand manually would I recommend building automation. And even then, start with the smallest possible technical solution - maybe a simple form that sends emails, not a full-featured platform.
The key insight: Your MVP should be your marketing and sales process, not your product. In the age of AI and no-code, the constraint isn't building - it's knowing what to build and for whom.
Market Testing
Test demand before building anything - use manual processes to validate the core value proposition exists
Manual Validation
Start with human-powered processes rather than automated systems - this reveals real user behavior and willingness to pay
Strategic Building
Only automate processes after manual validation proves demand - build the minimum technical solution that scales your proven process
Real Learning
Focus on learning about pricing, user behavior, and market dynamics rather than perfecting product features
Here's what I've observed across dozens of startup projects: the most successful founders spend 90% of their time on distribution and 10% on product development, while most founders do the opposite.
When you start with manual validation, you learn things that no amount of user testing or surveys can teach you:
Real pricing sensitivity: People lie in surveys about what they'll pay. They don't lie when you ask for their credit card.
Actual usage patterns: How people say they'll use your product versus how they actually use it are completely different.
Hidden friction points: The obstacles that kill deals aren't usually the ones you expect.
Channel preferences: Where your customers actually discover and evaluate solutions.
The marketplace client would have learned in two weeks what would have taken six months of platform development to discover. More importantly, they would have learned it for the cost of a domain name instead of their entire runway.
This approach doesn't just save time and money - it fundamentally changes how you think about product development. Instead of building features you think users want, you're solving problems you know they have.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Prototype vs MVP confusion kills startups: A prototype tests if your product works. An MVP tests if anyone wants it. Most founders build prototypes thinking they're building MVPs.
Manual validation beats sophisticated testing: One paying customer teaches you more than 100 survey responses or user interviews.
Distribution comes before product: The hardest part isn't building - it's finding people who will pay for what you built.
Technology amplifies demand, it doesn't create it: No amount of good UX can fix a product nobody wants.
Start manual, then automate: Every successful platform started with human processes that were later automated.
Time constraints force clarity: When you only have one day to "build" your MVP, you focus on the core value proposition.
Building is the easy part: With AI and no-code tools, anyone can build anything. The hard part is knowing what to build.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups:
Start with a landing page and waitlist, not a product
Manually onboard your first 10 customers via calls/demos
Use existing tools (Airtable, Notion, Zapier) before building custom features
Focus on proving people will pay before optimizing user experience
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores:
Test product demand with pre-orders or mockups
Start with a simple Shopify store, not a custom platform
Validate your supply chain manually before scaling
Focus on proving unit economics work before optimizing conversion