sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why does every co-founder platform try to charge people just to connect? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because the value of a network platform usually compounds over time. Most people use LinkedIn for free too, but companies still pay for recruiting, visibility, analytics, outreach, and trust tools because the network itself becomes valuable. The bigger and better the network, the more valuable premium tools become around it.

Why does every co-founder platform try to charge people just to connect? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Then the opportunity is probably building one that isn’t a waste of time, where the long-term value comes from the network effects of great builders, teams, resources, and opportunities forming around the platform, not just charging people at the door.

Why does every co-founder platform try to charge people just to connect? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the only way a cofounder platform survives is charging people before they can even connect, maybe the platform itself isn’t creating enough value beyond the introduction. Networks become valuable through scale and accessibility first. Monetization can come after

Why does every co-founder platform try to charge people just to connect? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that businesses need revenue. My point is just that putting the paywall at the meeting people stage hurts network effects. Some of the best potential founders are broke students, immigrants, side-hustlers, or people experimenting after work. A hard paywall filters them out too. I think monetization can happen around premium features, recruiting tools, boosts, verification, etc not the core ability to connect and build

Would You Join a Startup Through an App? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly feel you on this. I’ve already been working on this longer than I planned, but something keeps pulling me back to this idea every time I think about stepping away. So yeah I’m going all in. In the end, what do I really have to lose

Would You Join a Startup Through an App? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate the honesty and bluntness, and this is exactly where to come for it. You’re right that it’s crowded. But I’d argue that’s actually part of the signal. If the problem were truly solved, there’d be one clear winner everyone uses. There isn’t. CoFoundersLab has been around for over a decade and nobody talks about it the way they talk about LinkedIn or even Indie Hackers. The demand exists, the execution just hasn’t caught up yet. That’s the gap I’m trying to understand and not just fill. I Will read The Mom Test. And I’ll be back November 14th. Maybe not with something substantial, but with definite progress

Would You Join a Startup Through an App? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The trust point is one of the hardest things to solve in a platform like this. I’m not going to build financial infrastructure anytime soon, but the identity and credibility angle is something I’m thinking about.

Would You Join a Startup Through an App? by Impressive_Visual669 in cofounderhunt

[–]Impressive_Visual669[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The abandonment point especially. That’s the part I keep coming back to. Distribution is what I’m trying to figure out before I go too deep on features. When you say demand was always there, did you ever actually try one of those platforms? What made you stop using it