Jon Bishop

I agree with you, but CMO sounds impressive to a lot of people who don't know better. It's sort of a combination of saying what their audience wants to hear and using their audience's language. I don't like it as a marketer, but it's one of those pedantic expert things, like Apple store employees not correcting customers. It seems to be inexperienced indie hackers who are responding positively fwiw.

@CodveAi Many CMO/CEOs barely know how to use a computers. Not sure exactly how is that simulated with agents

I find giving agents job titles is LARPing. A CMO is not a content spam bot. A CEO is not a workflow for moving tasks around on a board. These are just software tools and workflows. They work the same without the titles.

This is a ridiculous stat in a ridiculous story: "The marginal cost of running an agent, had collapsed to, essentially, the cost of electricity." The marginal cost of a coding agent is not even remotely close to "the cost of electricity." These agents are absurdly expensive to use and run. Why do you think AI labs are banning people from having multiple $200 subscriptions? Because those subscriptions are heavily, heavily discounted to drive demand. Why did labs stop folks from using their subscription costs in OpenClaw? The OpenClaw guy had five max subs and was losing 20k a month building and running his amazing project (because he was retired and had the money to set in fire) before AI labs banned this practice of having multiple subs. In case you just missed it: Because these agents are expensive as hell to run. The cost of running coding agents daily on eight hour shifts is thousands of dollars a month at API pricing and that is subsidized too. My team regularly burns anywhere from 4K-8K a month across three people using the latest and greatest for an AI driven building workflow. That's not even agents running 24x7 "making money while you sleep" which is utter and total nonsense. This is one of the most spectacularly unprofitable businesses in history so far. People talking about the end of all work because this stuff runs for "pennies" cannot do even the most basic math. New NVIDIA chips don't even break even for data centers for like 24-36 months and they are basically obsolete by then. That doesn't count power and cooling and people to run it all. Imagine if your car was basically worth zero after three years? I'm so sick of these idiotic Population Bomb level stories about the end of all work and running agents for pennies. It's a mass delusion for people who can't be bothered to bust out a calculator on their phone for five seconds.

@skeptrune It always was and it's embarrassing that the industry ever thought otherwise

cluely is just a venture backed content house at this point

I think there are very few people worth listening to with these predictions because very few have a good enough grasp of both AI capabilities and their trajectory and how business and consumers adopt new tech/how the average person across the world reacts to it. I used to take these predictions from the people closest to the tech pretty seriously, but it's become clear over the years they have little understanding of why and how businesses buy tech. While they may be right that the tech has advanced to the point necessary to kill SaaS (though I'd disagree), to your point, this ignores well established behavior when it comes to why business's adopt tools. It's a similar thing to all the people predicting that there won't be a front end to software and we'll instead have highly customized, on demand UIs. Ok, the tech may get to that point, but that is not what users want.

The hot take of the moment is that SaaS is dead, but I don’t buy it. ​That’s not to say disruption isn’t real, because I think it absolutely is. AI will reshape entire categories. But the underlying need for enterprise software (and with it, core parts of our economy) doesn't disappear just because the technology gets better. Take CRM as an example. When a company hits around 100 people, you need a CRM, and that reliance grows as your company adds more employees. AI will change how CRMs work, what they surface, and how much manual input they require. But the need itself only intensifies as organizations scale.​ Or for a more fun example, think about advertising. In the Mad Men days, Don Draper would develop one campaign for the entire year. Digital completely disrupted that model by shifting from one campaign to thousands running simultaneously, and agencies had to rebuild around data and performance. But the industry itself got bigger. I think the same pattern holds for AI and SaaS. The products that treat AI as a bolt-on will struggle. The ones that rethink their experience around making people more effective will thrive and create enormous value.

@eldadfux Are you using any tools to analyze your repo traffic and user data? I’m working on a repo and Github’s native traffic analytics look really basic.

@benhaynes Are you using any tools to analyze your repo traffic and user data? I’m working on a repo and Github’s native traffic analytics look really basic.

@alexellisuk Are you using any tools to analyze your repo traffic and user data? I’m working on a repo and Github’s native traffic analytics look really basic.

@scaling01 Says Lisan al Gaib

fuck all the people who said sonnet 5 is definitely coming today

I would consider building relationships with power-users a product thing and something that should be done alongside whatever marketing you do. Cold outbound won't work at your price point. Have you looked at building out new, more expensive plans? What marketing got you to $1m ARR?

I want to spend $120,000 on marketing $20,000/month over six months This will be my biggest ever marketing bet at Senja But I want to scale from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 ARR and need to take bigger bets My brain is telling me to try and scale something measurable - meta ads, Google Ads, cold outbound But my gut thinks I should focus on the hard work of building relationships with power-users and influencers of our ICP Less measurable, slower to ramp-up, but a genuine opportunity to find and persuade the right people to use Senja, and get to success This work would then act as the foundation of future marketing activity But I'm torn What would you do? #BuildInPublic

Wondering what Product-Led Growth looks like for dev tools in 2026? Start with this great guest post from @draftdev and find out how PLG is evolving with AI and other trends this year: saasgrowthpros.com/product-led-gr…

@anupsingh_ai @MartinGTobias A couple paying customers is validation, definitely not PMF

B2B pre-seed with revenue is underpriced. MVP + paying customers proves product-market fit while most pre-seed companies are still validating hypotheses. The $500K-$2M range makes sense - enough to hire engineers and scale go-to-market, not enough to build bad habits. Focus on unit economics and CAC payback over vanity metrics.

Dear Algo, Please show this to B2B founders who have an MVP with a couple paying customers who want to raise a Pre Seed round of $500k-$2M before the end of the year. Tell me more bit.ly/pitchIV I am leading rounds

@winternet Definitely not a joke, that place is full of work rich, socially poor

this is a joke but you shouldn’t be allowed to throw parties in sf if you didn’t go to them in college

@sporadica This is why Yelp did so well in SF. They threw cool parties for people who had never been and had little hope of getting into cool parties.

Real though. Core issue w/ SF party culture is that most of the people throwing them never experienced a good party As a result, they resort to throwing weird versions of the only kind of events they /do/ know (networking events)

@ValueIdeaLog @KateClarkTweets Normally I'd agree, but have you seen how thirsty to look cool the current batch of founders are?

New from me: There’s a cohort of AI startups that have never had to try to raise money. Instead, VCs are going to wild lengths to get their attention. One investor folded origami cranes into a mosaic of AI startup Decagon’s logo and hid a term sheet inside. Others are offering Ferrari rides, private jets, and some extravagant gifts. Silly times in Silicon Valley, again: bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

@buildwithfede @aridutilh As someone who spent over a decade there, hard agree

@aridutilh you have a weird concept of heaven

San Francisco is literally heaven

@buildwithfede Yeah, that is a massive tax

$100k per year. This is bad

@Ge0lo @RichardMCNgo @Duderichy 😂 my exact thought

@RichardMCNgo @Duderichy "Women like this, but they're wrong." ???

> Once you notice how often “beautiful” is used as a default compliment for women, it’s hard to unsee Life pro tip You don’t need to be contrarian about everything! You’re not even married bro 😭

@nikunj "I have been called a boomer more than once when I have asked 😅" Red flag lol

I can’t believe I need to spell this out but people KEEP getting confused so here it is. There’s a few types of “ARR” floating around.. First, most* ARR is reported based on the last months revenue - multiplied by 12. This is called annualized run rate. That’s been standard for a while - even though it has its problems. Types of ARR: 1) Traditional ARR: Annual “recurring” revenue. There’s an actual subscription and you typically pay per seat. Your subscription can be monthly or annual. Annual is typically better since it traditionally has lower churn even though the “per month” cost is lower. Most of modern SaaS historically is sold this way (think Figma, Notion, Workday, Salesforce etc). Gross margins are typically high. Companies trade at 6-20x revenue multiples in the public markets and 20-100x in the private markets. The fact that it’s recurring makes it “sticky” - this is important since it’s different from the bottom two. 2) AI ARR: In the AI world, there has started to be a lot of usage based revenue in addition to seat based pricing. For usage, token usage with the large models or inference costs if you’re hosting your own. Now these fluctuate based on usage and usage one week may not be usage next week. But now the total spend per month is seat based + usage. Now this is where it gets interesting. You can now technically calculate your ARR as seat + highest usage for a given month (or dare I say day) and now annualized run rate is very inflated. Moreover margins on these businesses are very different since gross margins on usage are typically very low since most of that revenue is made by the model or inference companies. Proof is in the pudding here - but most investors are buying the hype and not digging in. Founders are running a tight process to avoid this diligence as well. I have been called a boomer more than once when I have asked 😅 3) GMV or non recurring revenue disguised as “ARR”: This is a new trend where companies who are making non-recurring revenue with very low gross margins are calling themselves ARR. They are being cheeky by calling it annualized revenue run rate by taking the last months revenue and multiplying by 12. But, the main difference is the gross margin profile is very different for these companies since for GMV most of your revenue is passed through in a marketplace. And those businesses should be valued VERY differently compared to traditional SaaS businesses. And it’s non recurring even though the customer is buying today - there’s typically no guarantee they buy tomorrow. Now, in a gold rush everyone is buying more and more so all looks gravy. I have nothing against these businesses - but let’s call a spade a spade is my only ask. Long post, but people really need to understand. Hope this helps clear up any questions! * I say most because I have seen companies repot annual recurring revenue based on a single days revenue multiplied by 365. Not the norm, but definitely happens in case 2.

@y_lukianov @pramodk73 Living up to your bio! Yeah, I hadn't realized how many indies are conflating usage based trials with free plans until now.

@pramodk73 I already told you that you had a free trial before, now you have it again but a different kind :) You never had a free plan, don’t listen to those people who tell you “remove free plan”. You can’t remove what you don’t have :) Let me be more specific. Free trials can differ in type: - time based - usage based and in payment details requirements: - the user has to enter the credit card details - no need for the card to start the trial What you had before was a usage based trial with no card required. Now you have a time based trial with the card required. That’s it. A free plan is something that a user can use indefinitely, which was never the case for you as far as I understand.

Its been a week and cant help but to add back the free plan. Here are my reasons - Got 20+ signups but none opted for trial - No indirect feedback to make the product better - No funnel to work on conversion - Skill issue Will be adding back free plan today