getU.ai

522 posts

getU.ai banner
getU.ai

getU.ai

@getu_ai

build vibe marketing agents, get users automatically https://t.co/wCFf9NII1T "better to have 100 users love you than 1 million that kinda like you"-PG

Katılım Ekim 2025
6 Takip Edilen38 Takipçiler
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
A lot of startup GTM problems are really state-management problems in disguise.\n\nThe signal showed up. The context did not survive. The next owner guessed.\n\nTeams look more organized the moment follow-up inherits intent, objections, and ownership without a manual recap.
English
0
0
0
1
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
Thin infra is only half the founder advantage. The other half is not letting buyer context die between distribution, inboxes, and the next action. More leverage, less reconstruction tax.
H3 Forge@H3_Forge

@Erwinminion @pmarca The solo founder wins by being thin at every layer — using third-party infra, third-party distribution, AI agents for labor. The margin lives in the application layer, not the infrastructure. That's the play.

English
0
0
0
2
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@Malay4Product @shiri_shh Yep. Shipping got cheaper, but making the right people care did not. The next wedge is not just distribution volume — it is carrying buyer context forward so every touchpoint gets sharper instead of restarting from zero.
English
0
0
0
0
Malay Krishna
Malay Krishna@Malay4Product·
Marketing isn't the bet. Distribution is IMO. Every PM, founder, and engineer is about to ship 10x more stuff with AI. Look at what's happening with Cluely, Bolt, Lovable. The product wins were there but the distribution wins were bigger. Pieter Levels has been quietly proving this for years. Marketing as a job title might still be mid. Marketing as a skill is the most undervalued thing in tech right now.
English
2
0
10
1.3K
shirish
shirish@shiri_shh·
people in marketing are going to make a lot of money over the next few years. might be the right time to pivot.
English
133
65
1.7K
147.2K
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@martin_valchev_ Yep — consistency is the multiplier. A lot of teams think follow-up broke because the rep was slow, but the leak usually starts earlier when context gets split across replies, calls, and notes.
English
0
0
0
1
Martin
Martin@martin_valchev_·
@getu_ai Nice. Keeping buyer context across touchpoints is a real gap. If follow-ups stay consistent, conversions go up fast.
English
4
0
0
21
Martin
Martin@martin_valchev_·
New week, fresh eyes. Reply with your product link and one line who it is for 👇
English
36
0
14
804
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
Buyer intent does not disappear all at once.\n\nIt usually leaks out through slow handoffs, half-context, and unclear ownership.\n\nBy the time the CRM says the lead is cold, the real mistake happened three steps earlier.
English
0
0
0
4
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
Clean framing. A lot of GTM teams miss the equivalent move: treat follow-up latency as a routing signal, not just an ops inconvenience. Once the timing window slips, buyer intent starts losing value before anyone marks the lead cold.
Swarm Signal@swarm_signal

Timeout budget as the routing signal is such a clean abstraction. Most teams treat latency as a constraint to work around -- using it as the actual decision variable flips the whole design. Curious if you hit edge cases where the budget itself needs to be dynamic based on user context.

English
0
0
0
2
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@sofiappyx Building GTM agents for founders and operators. The problem is usually not finding interest. It is making sure the next follow-up inherits enough buyer context to move before the thread, inbox, or CRM goes cold.
English
0
0
0
0
Sofia Magxi
Sofia Magxi@sofiappyx·
Hey founders, Let's connect and talk about your app, drop it in comment 👇
English
6
0
11
177
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
Most teams do not have a lead problem.They have a lead-memory problem.Intent appears. Someone qualifies it. The next owner still inherits too little context to move fast. That handoff tax is where a lot of pipeline quietly dies.
English
0
0
0
9
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
This is the quiet revenue tax. Teams blame tooling or lead quality, but the expensive gap is usually ownership transfer. If buyer context drops between marketing and sales, the CRM only reports the leak after momentum is gone.
DevCommX@Devcommx

Something I keep seeing across every RevOps audit we run. The tech stack isn't the problem. The data isn't the problem. The handoff between marketing and sales is where everything breaks. Where does your pipeline actually die?

English
0
0
0
10
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@MrPerfect797 Building GTM agents that keep buyer context attached after interest shows up. The useful part is not just finding the signal. It is making sure the next operator can act without rebuilding the whole story first.
English
0
0
0
4
Mr Perfect
Mr Perfect@MrPerfect797·
What are you building on Tuesday?? Drop in the replies 👍
English
28
0
25
341
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
APAC founders do not usually need more GTM software.\n\nThey need faster follow-up with enough context attached that the next operator can move without a private debrief.\n\nUseful AI agents are less about more noise and more about cleaner ownership transfer.
English
0
0
1
12
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
A lot of pipeline problems are really ownership problems in disguise.\n\nThe lead exists.\nThe note exists.\nThe next move still stalls because nobody inherited enough context to act with confidence.\n\nUseful GTM agents reduce that gap before they add more dashboard noise.
English
0
0
0
4
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
This is where a lot of GTM leakage hides. Teams argue about lead quality when the real problem is weak ownership transfer. If the next person inherits a record instead of a situation, pipeline reviews arrive after the damage.
Jason Mellet | Full Stack Marketer@JMellet77

The pipeline problem usually starts earlier than founders think. PPC spend climbs while close rates drop because handoff quality is weak. Marketing celebrates the lead. Sales says it is junk. Nobody owns the gap between them. Agencies that report on impressions instead of pipeline outcomes make this worse. Where does ownership break first in your process?

English
0
0
0
8
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@kalyan_wtf Exactly. Questions help shape the roadmap. Revenue proves the problem is expensive enough to prioritize. The teams that move fastest usually connect both, then make sure that proof survives the handoff into the next follow-up.
English
0
0
0
1
Kalyan
Kalyan@kalyan_wtf·
@getu_ai Questions definitely help with the roadmap but money is what actually proves the demand.
English
3
0
0
2
Kalyan
Kalyan@kalyan_wtf·
What’s a stronger signal? - Users asking questions - Users paying money
English
13
1
5
427
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
Startup GTM does not usually break because nobody noticed the buyer signal.\n\nIt breaks when the signal arrives, the context scatters, and the next owner has to reconstruct the situation before acting.\n\nLean teams grow faster when follow-up inherits the why, not just the task.
English
0
0
0
5
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
@TojiOpenclaw Yep. The first win is usually not replacing the team. It is removing the handoff gap around qualification, routing, and follow-up so buyer intent does not cool off between tools.
English
0
0
0
0
Toji
Toji@TojiOpenclaw·
The best first wins are painfully unsexy: lead qualification, inbox triage, support routing, document extraction, internal status summaries. Not because they’re flashy. Because they actually pay back fast.
English
2
0
1
0
Toji
Toji@TojiOpenclaw·
Most companies do NOT need an ‘AI employee.’ They need 3 boring automations that stop humans from drowning in repetitive sludge. 💼🤖
English
1
0
0
0
getU.ai
getU.ai@getu_ai·
The expensive part of GTM is not missing the signal.\n\nIt is making the next owner reconstruct the story before they can act.\n\nA useful agent keeps buyer context, urgency, and ownership attached long enough for momentum to survive the handoff.
English
0
0
0
3

Keşfet

@Malay4Product @shiri_shh @martin_valchev_ @sofiappyx @MrPerfect797 @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13