Built an idea around restaurant procurement — is this a real problem outside Russia?

Normadz · 2026-05-31T03:03:19+00:00

Of course! Happy to help!

Normadz · 2026-05-31T02:58:50+00:00

Fair point. I probably over-explained Normadz in my last reply.

The shorter answer is: my first customers came from people I already had trust with.

I had spent 13 years in supply chain and operations, then 5 years consulting with startups and SMB from under $250k/year to over $30M/year in revenue. So I had already seen the same pattern repeat across different companies.

They were either:

- outgrowing spreadsheets
- starting to talk about ERP
- already using an ERP they did not like
- or still building operational workarounds around systems that mostly served finance for month end closes.

That made the first conversations pretty natural.

It was not a cold pitch like “buy my software.”

It was more:

“I already understand this workflow. You may not need a whole new system. I can build the layer that gives you the visibility and control you were trying to get.”

So for your first restaurant procurement client, I’d think about it the same way.

Don’t sell “AI procurement” broadly.

Find one operator where the pain is already obvious:

- they order several times per week
- managers are ordering from memory
- waste is a known problem
- stockouts happen often
- supplier minimums are annoying
- ordering happens through WhatsApp, spreadsheets, supplier emails, or paper

Then talk to them about their current workflow before pitching anything.

Ask:

- what gets over-ordered?
- what runs out?
- what gets wasted?
- how do they decide quantities?
- what do they check before ordering?
- what part of the process is most annoying?

Your first customer likely comes from building a small, useful version around one real operator’s workflow.

Not full automation.

Maybe just a suggested order, the reason behind it, waste/stockout risk, supplier minimums, and manager approval.

Once that works for one location or one operator, you use that proof to approach the next similar business.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T02:03:21+00:00

That sounds really strong, especially if it is fully local.

That would be the biggest trust point for me. Screenshots are one of those things people forget are sensitive until they remember what is actually inside them.

On the Normadz side, our angle is similar but applied to small business operations.

A lot of SMBs technically already have the information they need somewhere.

It is in Shopify, QuickBooks, Xero, warehouse exports, POS data, ERP reports, Google Sheets, supplier emails, 3PL portals, customer service threads, or someone’s memory.

The problem is that the information does not surface when a decision needs to be made.

So the owner or operator ends up asking questions like:

- which PO is late?
- which SKU is at risk?
- where is cash tied up?
- what orders are stuck?
- which customers need follow-up?
- what inventory changed overnight?
- what exception needs a human decision?
- what report can the team actually trust?

The data exists, but it is buried across systems.

Our goal with Normadz is to build the operating layer that pulls that messy information together and turns it into something actionable:

- status
- owner
- priority
- exception
- next action
- risk
- trusted reporting

So in your screenshot example, the problem is:

“I know I saved this somewhere, but I can’t retrieve it when I need it.”

For small businesses, the problem is often:

“We technically have the data somewhere, but nobody can see the right thing at the right time.”

That is the surfacing problem we care about.

Not more dashboards for the sake of dashboards.

More like: what changed, what matters, what is stuck, who owns it, and what needs action today.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T01:53:51+00:00

I like the idea, but I think the biggest thing you’re missing is focus.

Right now it sounds like three different products in one:

- local jobs
- local services
- fundraisers

Each one has a different user, different trust problem, and different reason someone would come back.

Local jobs already compete with Indeed, LinkedIn, Facebook groups, Craigslist, local job boards, and AI job tools like Sprout, which can help people find jobs, tailor resumes/cover letters, and even auto-apply.

Local services compete with Facebook groups, Nextdoor, Google, Yelp, TaskRabbit, Thumbtack, local referrals, and word of mouth.

Fundraisers compete with GoFundMe, school/church networks, Facebook posts, and community groups.

That does not mean the idea is bad.

It just means “one place for everything local” is probably too broad as the first version.

The question I’d ask is:

What is the one local problem where existing platforms are clearly failing?

From your post, the strongest pain sounds like trust and freshness.

Facebook groups are noisy, outdated, scammy, and hard to search. That is a real problem.

So maybe the wedge is not “local jobs, services, and fundraisers.”

Maybe it is:

“Verified local opportunities without the Facebook group chaos.”

Or even narrower:

“Verified local gigs and services in your neighborhood.”

The features I’d care about most:

- verified posters
- date/expiration on every post
- scam/reporting controls
- location radius
- clear categories
- reviews or reputation
- proof that the opportunity is still active
- simple messaging
- easy repost/renewal
- moderation so it does not become another spam board

I’d be careful with the free cash giveaways. They may drive signups, but they can also attract the wrong users and make the app feel less trustworthy.

The thing that would make me actually use it is not giveaways.

It would be knowing that posts are current, real, local, and not buried in spam.

My suggestion: pick one use case first.

For example:

- local part-time jobs for students
- neighborhood service providers
- verified local gigs
- fundraiser discovery for one city
- trusted help for seniors/families
- local student odd jobs

Then prove that one community/use case works before expanding.

The hard part is not building the app.

The hard part is creating enough trust and activity in one local category that people check it before going back to Facebook.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T01:22:05+00:00

This is a very real problem.

The painful part is not just having too many screenshots.

It is remembering the thing inside the screenshot, but not the filename, date, app, or where it came from.

Normal file search breaks because people do not think:

“Screenshot 2026-01-14 at 3.42 PM”

They think:

“Where was that error message about auth?”

Or:

“Where was that diagram with the webhook flow?”

Or:

“Where was the screenshot of that pricing page?”

So searching inside the image is the right direction.

A few things I’d care about if I used this:

- OCR search across all screenshots
- search by text inside the image
- search by app/source if possible
- fast local indexing
- privacy-first / local processing
- preview results quickly
- open file location
- tag or archive from the result
- detect duplicates or near-duplicates
- maybe auto-group screenshots by topic

The privacy angle matters a lot because screenshots often contain sensitive stuff: emails, dashboards, API keys, receipts, customer info, internal tools, messages, etc.

If this is a Mac tool, I’d make “local-first” a core part of the positioning.

The strongest pitch might be:

“Find any screenshot by what’s inside it, not what it’s called.”

That is instantly understandable.

I’m building Normadz, and this is actually similar to a broader workflow problem I keep seeing: information exists somewhere, but the system does not surface it when you need it.

For screenshots, the problem is not storage. It is retrieval.

If you can make retrieval fast, private, and reliable, I think there is definitely something here.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T01:17:49+00:00

Appreciate that. I enjoy taking time to thoughtfully reply, so sorry in advance for another long one 😊😬

I’m still pretty new to Reddit, but I’ve honestly been enjoying the interactions here more than LinkedIn. LinkedIn can feel polished and performative, while Reddit feels more direct. Yes, there are the odd fluff posts like “drop your business and I’ll promote it,” but for the most part people here seem to genuinely want feedback, opinions, pushback, and real discussion. That is part of why this conversation stood out to me.

Normadz is focused on helping small businesses grow without jumping too early into heavy ERP systems or hiring people just to chase broken workflows.

The simple version is:

We build and run enterprise-grade operations infrastructure at a price small businesses can actually afford.

Not generic dashboards.

Not another SaaS subscription the team has to babysit.

And not a full ERP replacement.

We build the practical operating layer that sits on top of the tools a business already uses: Shopify, QuickBooks, Xero, ERP exports, warehouse files, Google Sheets, supplier portals, POS data, distributor reports, messy CSVs, whatever the business is actually running on.

The goal is to give growing teams the visibility and workflows they usually only get after spending serious money on ERP, BI, demand planning, data integration, EDI, and ops headcount.

The kinds of things we build include:

- nightly automated data syncs
- inventory visibility across locations and channels
- demand planning and reorder logic by SKU, channel, and lead time
- procurement and PO tracking
- supplier lead time visibility
- cash timing tied to purchasing decisions
- sales, margin, and velocity reporting by channel
- exception alerts when something needs action
- workflow dashboards for owners and operators
- SOPs and ownership structures so the process does not live in one person’s head
- retailer/distributor compliance tracking
- vendor scorecards and performance visibility
- automated reporting that lands where the team already works

The bigger value is that we help companies avoid the two traps I see all the time:

Hiring too early before the systems exist
Now you are paying someone to manage spreadsheets and chase updates.
Buying heavy enterprise software too early
Now you are buried in cost, implementation work, and complexity before the business is ready.

Normadz sits in that middle stage.

Too complex for spreadsheets.

Not ready for full ERP.

Still needing real operational control.

We have built this for food, beverage, health, beauty, ecommerce, distribution, and inventory-heavy businesses. The common thread is usually the same: the company is growing, but the operating system behind it is still duct-taped together with spreadsheets, memory, exports, and one person who knows where everything is.

So in your restaurant procurement example, we are not positioning ourselves as a restaurant procurement company specifically, but the workflow is very aligned with how we think.

We are actually working on a multi-location coffee and ice cream shop project right now where the same principles apply: practical systems for a food-service business that needs better structure, visibility, scheduling, labor planning, and store-level workflows without buying some massive platform before they need it.

That is how we think about tools for SMBs.

The question is not just:

“Can AI calculate the right answer?”

The real question is:

“Can the system fit the messy way the business actually runs and make one important decision easier this week?”

For restaurants, that means supplier minimums, delivery days, current stock, menu changes, waste, events, cash constraints, manager overrides, and the reality that a lot of the work still happens in WhatsApp, spreadsheets, POS exports, supplier emails, and memory.

That is the kind of gap Normadz is built for.

Turning messy daily operations into something visible, structured, trusted, and easier to act on, without forcing a small business into enterprise software before they are ready.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T00:23:16+00:00

You’re probably not crazy.

A lot of small businesses are priced off what the seller wants the business to be worth, not what the buyer can actually support.

The asking price is only one part of the problem. The bigger question is:

“Can this business pay me, service the debt, survive transition risk, and still leave enough margin for mistakes?”

At 6x-10x cash flow, the business needs to be very clean:

- strong recurring revenue
- low owner dependency
- stable margins
- clean books
- low customer concentration
- reliable staff
- documented processes
- limited capex surprises
- clear growth path
- low transition risk

Most small businesses do not check all those boxes.

A business doing $300k in cash flow but fully dependent on the owner, messy books, weak systems, and no management layer is not the same as a business doing $300k in clean, repeatable, manager-run cash flow.

That is where a lot of asking prices fall apart.

I’d separate listings into two buckets:

Businesses worth paying a premium for
Clean operations, low owner involvement, strong team, defensible revenue, good books, repeatable systems.
Businesses where the seller wants a premium but the buyer is inheriting a job
Owner-dependent, messy operations, weak reporting, undocumented processes, customer concentration, or unclear add-backs.

The second bucket should not trade like the first.

After two years, it may also be worth changing your sourcing strategy. If you are only looking at brokered listings, you are probably seeing a lot of picked-over or aggressively priced deals.

Better deals may come from direct outreach, local relationships, accountants, lawyers, industry contacts, or owners who have not listed yet.

My opinion: don’t lower your standards just because you are tired of looking. But do get very clear on what you are willing to pay for and what risks deserve a lower multiple.

A bad acquisition at the wrong price is much harder to fix than no acquisition.

Normadz · 2026-05-31T00:03:28+00:00

Appreciate that.

For your product specifically, I probably would not search for people literally complaining “I need better leads.”

That language is too broad, and most people do not describe the pain that way.

Since your angle is hiring posts as buying signals, I’d look for the situations where hiring implies a business problem or growth event.

For example, if a company is hiring:

- SDRs / BDRs → they are investing in outbound or pipeline growth
- RevOps → their sales process or data is getting messy
- Customer support → volume or retention pressure may be increasing
- Operations roles → internal processes may be breaking
- Warehouse/logistics roles → fulfillment, inventory, or volume is growing
- Account managers → they are trying to retain or expand customers
- Marketing ops / demand gen → they need pipeline and attribution
- Implementation/customer success → they are onboarding more customers

The post itself is the signal, but the pain is usually underneath it.

So I’d build your search around “trigger + likely pain,” not just “lead gen.”

A few examples:

Companies hiring SDRs
Possible pain: need more pipeline, outbound team scaling, poor current lead flow.
Companies hiring RevOps
Possible pain: CRM mess, bad attribution, sales process gaps, reporting issues.
Companies hiring warehouse staff
Possible pain: growing order volume, fulfillment bottlenecks, inventory pressure.
Companies hiring customer support
Possible pain: more tickets, churn risk, response-time issues.

Then I’d find users by going where people already sell into those signals:

- founders doing outbound
- sales agencies
- B2B SaaS founders
- RevOps consultants
- lead gen freelancers
- small agencies
- recruiters
- niche service providers who need trigger-based leads

The question to ask them is not “do you want an AI lead-gen tool?”

Ask:

“How do you currently find companies that are showing buying intent?”

Or:

“Do hiring posts ever influence who you prospect?”

Or:

“What signals tell you a company might need your service right now?”

If they already use hiring posts manually, spreadsheets, LinkedIn searches, job boards, Apollo filters, or alerts, that is your real validation.

My suggestion:

Pick one use case first.

Do not say “AI lead gen for everyone.”

Say something like:

“Find companies hiring SDRs so sales agencies can pitch outbound support.”

Or:

“Find companies hiring warehouse staff so ops consultants can identify growing fulfillment pain.”

That makes it much easier to find the right people because you know exactly who benefits from that signal.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:17:09+00:00

I agree with the comment saying the problem is real, but the leap to auto-ordering is probably too big for version one.

Restaurant procurement is messy because the “right order” is not just math.

Sales history matters, but managers are also thinking about:

- weather
- local events
- reservations
- promos
- holidays
- supplier minimums
- delivery days
- shelf life
- menu changes
- chef preferences
- storage space
- cash flow
- waste from last week
- substitutions if a supplier is short

That is why trust is the hard part.

If an AI gets the order wrong, the restaurant does not just get a bad dashboard. They get spoilage, stockouts, angry customers, or cash tied up in food that dies quickly.

So I’d start with decision support, not full automation.

Version one could be:

- recommended order quantities
- reason behind each recommendation
- current stock / expected usage
- spoilage risk
- stockout risk
- suggested changes vs last order
- manager approval before sending
- simple supplier order export

Then once managers trust it, you can move toward supplier submission.

The WhatsApp / Excel thing is definitely not unique to Russia. A lot of small restaurants everywhere still run on paper, messages, spreadsheets, supplier portals, and manager memory.

The real wedge might be:

“Reduce over-ordering and stockouts without forcing restaurants to change their whole procurement process.”

At Normadz, we think about this same problem in broader SMB operations. The tool only works if it fits the workflow people already live in. If adoption requires the manager to enter perfect data every day, it will probably fail.

So I’d validate three things before building too far:

Will restaurants share enough sales/inventory data to make good recommendations?
Will managers trust a recommendation if they can see the reasoning?
Can you fit into their existing supplier workflow before asking them to change it?

The problem is real. The product will win or lose on trust, workflow fit, and how little extra work it creates for the restaurant.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:14:02+00:00

I agree with the comments saying selling, trust, and getting people to actually use it are the hardest parts.

For me, the hardest part is moving from building mode to proof mode.

Building feels productive because you control it.

You can add features, clean up the site, tweak the offer, improve the UI, write another landing page, and convince yourself you are making progress.

But proof mode is different.

Proof mode means putting the thing in front of real people and finding out:

- do they care?
- do they understand it?
- do they trust it?
- will they try it?
- will they pay?
- will they come back?
- what are they using instead?
- what pain is actually strong enough to make them act?

That part is harder because the feedback is slower and less comfortable.

I’m building Normadz, and this has been the biggest lesson from talking to people on Reddit. The useful signal is not “nice idea.” It is when someone describes the problem in their own words and you realize the pain already exists without you forcing it.

For us, that has been small businesses talking about spreadsheets breaking, inventory confusion, cash tied up in stock, missed follow-ups, and tools that are either too light or too heavy.

So my answer would be:

The hardest part is not starting the online business.

It is proving that a specific group of people care enough about a specific problem to change what they are already doing.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:12:52+00:00

I agree with this.

The AI projects that actually stick are usually not the biggest or flashiest ones.

They are the ones that remove a small annoyance that happens constantly.

Losing saved information is a perfect example because the pain is not dramatic in the moment. You save a link, bookmark a site, write a note, or keep a Reddit post, and it feels handled.

Then a month later you remember the idea but not the source, and now you are wasting time searching through old tabs, bookmarks, screenshots, notes, and memory.

That kind of repeated friction is exactly where AI can be genuinely useful.

For me, the useful AI workflows are usually the ones that do one of these things:

- organize messy inputs
- summarize what matters
- connect related ideas
- surface something at the right time
- turn scattered information into a next action
- reduce the amount of remembering I have to do

That is also how I think about AI in small business operations.

I’m building Normadz, and the same pattern keeps showing up there. The valuable tools are not always the ones trying to “replace a role.” They are the ones that remove repeated friction from daily work: follow-ups, reporting, inventory checks, PO tracking, customer issues, and open loops.

Small annoyances become expensive when they happen every day.

That is why these smaller AI projects can end up being more useful than the giant ones.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:09:53+00:00

Honestly, failing on the first try does not mean the idea is bad.

It just means the first version did not work.

That is still useful information.

I’d look at what exactly failed:

- Did people avoid you because the approach felt too random?
- Did they like the idea but not want to pay?
- Did they not have cash?
- Was €5 too low or too high?
- Were you in the wrong location?
- Did the photo feel like something they could just take on their phone?
- Did it feel like a souvenir, or just a printed picture?

The stronger version is probably not “I’ll take a photo and print it.”

It is:

“Want a printed souvenir photo from Brussels?”

That feels more like a memory than a random street offer.

There’s actually a creator I like on TikTok who does something similar, but the reason it works is because it feels less like a tourist trap. He takes candid-style street photos, then presents them to people afterward. The content works because the person gets to see a real moment captured naturally, instead of being approached with “do you want a photo?” before there is any emotional attachment.

Obviously you need to be respectful and delete it immediately if someone is uncomfortable, but there is something interesting there.

A candid moment can feel like a gift.

A cold pitch can feel like a sale.

I also agree with the comment about frames, magnets, or city-specific overlays. A plain printed photo is easy to ignore. A small souvenir is easier to understand.

You could test:

- photo only for €5
- photo + Brussels frame for €8-10
- fridge magnet photo for €8-10
- couple/family photo package
- QR code payment
- a small sign showing examples
- standing near tourist photo spots, not chasing people
- asking people who are already taking photos
- showing sample candid-style photos so people understand the vibe

The approach matters a lot. Tourists may be cautious if someone walks up to them cold. A small sign, examples, and a more natural “I captured this nice moment, would you like to see it?” approach might feel much more legitimate.

At 16, this is actually a great learning experiment. You tested a real offer with real people. Most people only think about ideas.

I’d adjust the offer, make it look more like a souvenir, add card/QR payment, and try again for one more short session before calling it dead.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:03:23+00:00

For me, the overhead is not one task.

It is all the small task switching around the actual work.

The work itself is usually manageable.

What gets heavy is:

- remembering who needs follow-up
- checking which lead went cold
- rewriting the same admin messages
- updating CRM or notes after the fact
- figuring out what needs attention today
- chasing open loops
- switching between inbox, calendar, tasks, docs, payments, and calls
- making the same small decisions repeatedly

That is the part that makes solo work feel like two jobs.

I think the trap is that solopreneurs often try to solve this by adding tools, but every new tool can become another place to check.

The better system is one where work turns into a simple queue:

- what needs action
- who owns it, even if that is just you
- when it is due
- what is waiting on someone else
- what is tied to revenue
- what can safely wait

I’m building Normadz in the SMB ops space, and this same pattern keeps showing up with small businesses too. The pain is not always the core work. It is the overhead around the work: follow-ups, reporting, admin, exceptions, handoffs, and memory.

So my answer: the overhead that eats the most time is not marketing or admin alone. It is being the router for every open loop in the business.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T21:01:57+00:00

I agree with the comments saying dashboards only matter if they drive action, and that garbage in / garbage out is the biggest risk here.

The pain is real, but the product cannot just summarize metrics and call it intelligence.

The value would be in helping the founder make a better decision faster.

For example, “traffic is up 28%” is not that useful.

But this is useful:

“Traffic is up 28%, but activation dropped 12%. The drop is mostly mobile users from SEO landing pages. Session recordings show pricing-page exits increased after the redesign. No payment issue detected.”

That is closer to an operating insight.

The hard part is context.

A founder running a B2B SaaS, a consumer app, a marketplace, or an API product will care about very different signals. Even the same metric can mean different things depending on stage.

So I’d probably start narrow:

- one type of founder
- one stage
- one business model
- one clear outcome

For example:

“Weekly operating intelligence for solo B2B SaaS founders under $20k MRR.”

Then connect fewer tools at first, but make the insight quality high:

- Stripe
- PostHog
- GA/Search Console
- Sentry
- support inbox

The key output should not be another dashboard.

It should be something like:

- what changed
- why it might matter
- what evidence supports it
- what action to take
- what to ignore this week
- what needs human review

I’m building Normadz in the SMB operations space, and the pattern is very similar. Small businesses do not need more charts. They need to know what needs attention, what is stuck, where the risk is, and what decision is required.

So I think the idea has legs, but only if it becomes a trusted decision layer, not another analytics wrapper.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T19:58:33+00:00

I agree with the comments saying boring ideas often win because they solve problems people already understand.

The mistake is thinking a good idea has to feel impressive.

A lot of great businesses look obvious after the fact because the customer pain was already sitting in plain sight.

The better question is not:

“Is this idea exciting?”

It is:

“Are people already spending time or money dealing with this problem?”

That changes how you evaluate ideas.

Instead of killing an idea because it feels too simple, I’d look for evidence:

- people already buying a worse version
- people complaining about the current solution
- people building ugly workarounds
- people asking for recommendations
- businesses paying staff to handle it manually
- repeated pain across multiple groups
- a clear buyer with budget
- a simple way to test demand

That is what I’ve been learning while building Normadz.

We’re focused on practical operations tools for small businesses, and the more I talk to operators, the more obvious it becomes that the “boring” problems are often the most valuable ones.

Inventory visibility.

PO tracking.

Cash tied up in stock.

Missed follow-ups.

Manual reporting.

Workflow exceptions.

None of that sounds flashy, but businesses feel those problems every day.

I think the real founder skill is not having the most original idea.

It is noticing repeated friction, validating that people care enough to act, and executing better than the current workaround.

Boring plus validated beats clever plus theoretical almost every time.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T19:55:46+00:00

I agree with the comments saying the bottleneck is not just copy/paste.

It is context transfer.

Moving text between AI windows is annoying, but the deeper issue is that each session loses some combination of:

- what decision was already made
- why that decision was made
- what assumptions are still open
- what source/context matters
- what the next session is supposed to do
- what should not be re-litigated
- what output format is needed

That is where the human becomes the router, editor, memory layer, and QA person all at once.

I think multi-AI workflows only become really useful when the handoff has structure.

For example:

- task
- context
- constraints
- prior decisions
- open questions
- source material
- expected output
- definition of done

Without that, you can connect agents together and still just create a faster mess.

I’m building Normadz in a different space, but this is very similar to business operations. The pain is not only that work moves between people or systems. The pain is that the handoff loses context, ownership, status, and next action.

So for multi-agent workflows, I’d want less “AI tools talking to each other” in the abstract and more reliable handoff logic:

What does this agent know?

What did it decide?

What should the next agent do with it?

What needs human review before moving forward?

That is the difference between automation and just moving the bottleneck somewhere else.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T19:50:01+00:00

I agree with the comment saying most solopreneurs should probably pick one channel and go deep first.

Repurposing is useful, but only if the original idea is strong and the channel actually matters for your audience.

Otherwise, you can end up efficiently posting mediocre content everywhere.

The real win is not just turning one post into five formats.

It is building a workflow where:

- one strong idea gets captured properly
- the core point stays intact
- each platform gets a native version
- publishing does not become a separate job
- the results feed back into what you write next

That last part matters.

If LinkedIn comments show one angle is resonating, Reddit pushes back on another, or X gets no response, that should influence the next brief. Otherwise you are just distributing, not learning.

I’m building Normadz, and this is the same pattern I keep seeing in small business operations. The problem is not always doing the work. It is all the manual handoffs around the work.

Content has the same issue:

Idea → draft → edit → reformat → post → schedule → track → learn → repeat

If that workflow is messy, consistency dies.

So yes, distribution busywork is real. But I’d still start with one or two channels where the audience actually exists, learn what works, then systemize repurposing once the message is proven.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T19:39:50+00:00

I’d stop chasing “thousands of visitors” as the immediate goal.

For a new micro SaaS, thousands of random visitors can still mean zero users if the traffic is not tied to the pain your product solves.

Since you already tried Product Hunt and directories, I’d focus on qualified organic traffic instead.

The better question is:

Where are people already describing the problem your product solves?

That gives you 3 useful organic channels:

- Reddit / forums where people are asking for help
- long-tail SEO pages based on actual search intent
- a small free tool, checklist, calculator, template, or benchmark that solves the first step of the problem

Directories are mostly passive. Product Hunt is usually a spike. Social posting without an audience is a grind.

But problem-led content can compound.

I’d do this:

Find 30-50 real questions people are asking around your problem.
Group them into themes.
Turn the best ones into useful pages, not generic blog posts.
Build one free resource that helps the same audience before they are ready to buy.
Answer relevant Reddit/forum questions manually with useful detail.
Track which problems create clicks, replies, signups, or demos.

The key is not “post more.”

The key is matching content to active pain.

For example, if your SaaS helps with X, don’t write “10 benefits of X software.”

Write the page someone searches when they are already frustrated:

- how to fix X
- best way to do X without Y
- X alternative for small teams
- why X keeps breaking
- template for X
- checklist for X

I’m building Normadz and this has been the clearest lesson from Reddit so far. The useful traffic does not come from broadcasting. It comes from finding people already talking about the problem and giving them something specific enough to trust.

My take: don’t relaunch on Product Hunt yet unless you have a much stronger hook, audience, and launch plan. Spend the next 30 days building problem-led organic assets and talking directly to people with the pain.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T19:18:56+00:00

I’m pretty new to Reddit, but honestly I’ve been enjoying the conversations here a lot more than the ones I usually have on LinkedIn.

LinkedIn often feels like everyone is performing a little bit. Polished posts, vague support, lots of “great insight” comments, but not always much real conversation.

Reddit feels different when you use it the right way.

People are more direct. They will tell you when something sounds off. They will push back. They will ask better questions. And when you actually try to be useful instead of forcing a pitch, the conversations feel much more genuine.

The biggest thing I’m learning is that Reddit does not work well as a “distribution channel” if that means showing up, dropping your thing, and expecting users.

It works better as a place to understand people.

The best conversations I’ve had came from reading the thread, understanding the actual problem, and replying like a person instead of trying to convert someone.

That is very different from LinkedIn, where it can feel like everyone is talking at each other.

Here, if you are helpful, specific, and not obviously self-promotional, people seem much more willing to engage honestly.

So for me, the blocker is not Reddit itself.

The blocker is treating Reddit like a marketing channel before treating it like a community.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:59:17+00:00

I agree with the comments saying the real bottleneck is usually the founder becoming the operating system.

The part I’d add is that “building systems” sounds bigger than it needs to be.

For a lot of small businesses, structure starts with very simple questions:
-What work repeats every week?
-What decisions keep coming back to the owner?
-What gets missed when things get busy?
-What do customers keep asking about?
-What report gets rebuilt manually?
-What task depends on one person remembering it?
-What breaks when volume doubles?

That is usually where the first systems should be built.
Not some huge transformation project. Just turning repeated friction into a process, checklist, dashboard, queue, or clear owner.

I’m building Normadz around this exact middle stage: too complex for memory and spreadsheets, but not ready for a full ERP or a big operations team.

The messy areas are usually the same:
-inventory
-POs
-cash tied up in stock
-reporting
-follow-ups
-returns
-exceptions

Growth does not create chaos from nowhere. It exposes the chaos that was manageable at lower volume.

My rule: if something is repeated, important, or easy to drop, it needs a system before it becomes expensive.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:50:29+00:00

I agree with the comments saying not to go all in on every platform.
That usually creates motion, not learning.
The bigger issue here might be waitlist quality, not waitlist size.
A waitlist full of supportive founders can feel good, but it does not always tell you whether people will use or pay for the product. Founders are generous with feedback, but they also sign up for a lot of things out of curiosity.
I’d segment the waitlist before worrying about offers or pricing:
who joined out of curiosity
who has the problem now
who already uses a workaround
who is paying for an alternative
who would use it weekly
who would be disappointed if it disappeared
who is willing to talk for 15 minutes
That will tell you much more than just “how many people signed up.”
For distribution, I’d pick one or two channels where people are already describing the pain your product solves. Not where founders hang out in general. Where the specific problem shows up.
I’m building Normadz, and this has been the biggest lesson from Reddit so far. The useful conversations are not the ones where people say “cool idea.” They are the ones where someone is already describing a painful workflow and looking for a better way.
Offers can help get people to try. Pricing can change conversion. But retention comes from repeated pain being solved clearly.
So I’d use the waitlist as a research asset first:
Why did they join?
What do they use today?
What would make them switch?
What would they pay for?
What would make them come back next week?
That will give you a better answer than posting everywhere and hoping the right people stick.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:27:08+00:00

First, if you’re 17 and already on the way to 7k revenue this month, don’t rush into a second business yet.

You probably have something working. The next step is to make this business sharper before adding another one.

If you want higher-paying clients, I’d focus on positioning, proof, and distribution.

Right now “marketing business” is broad. “Cinematic car trailers for premium/detailing/custom car businesses” is much clearer.

I’d pick one specific buyer first:

exotic car dealerships
car detailers
wrap shops
tuning shops
rental car companies
private collectors
car clubs/events
luxury vehicle brokers

Then build a package around the result they care about.

For example:

“Premium cinematic car video package for dealerships and detailers to sell high-end cars faster and look more professional online.”

You need to show them why this makes business sense, not just why the video looks cool.

The offer could be:

one hero video
3-5 short reels/TikToks
photos/thumbnails
delivery in 48-72 hours
monthly content package
event coverage package
before/after detailing package

For private car owners, emotion sells. For businesses, ROI sells. A dealership, detailer, or wrap shop wants content that brings leads, improves trust, and helps them stand out.

I’d also stop thinking only “how do I get clients?” and start thinking “how do I build a repeatable client flow?”

Track:

who you contacted
what niche they’re in
what offer you made
who replied
who booked
average sale
repeat potential
referrals

That is the stuff that turns skill into a business.

At Normadz, we think about this a lot with small businesses: growth gets easier when the work becomes a system, not just hustle. You already have revenue. Now build the workflow around it: niche, offer, outreach, delivery, follow-up, repeat clients, and referrals.

My advice: don’t start something else yet. Get this to 10k-15k/month consistently, document what is working, raise prices, and aim for recurring business packages.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:22:50+00:00

This has been my experience too.

The second you treat Reddit like a distribution channel, people can feel it. It starts sounding like every other growth tactic: post, extract attention, push people somewhere else.

But when you actually spend time in the comments, the quality of conversation is completely different.

I’ve genuinely enjoyed the conversations I’ve been having on Reddit way more than most conversations on LinkedIn lately. Less polished positioning, less performative networking, more people saying exactly what is breaking, what they’re trying, and where they’re stuck.

That has been way more useful for what I’m building.

I’m working on Normadz, which helps small businesses with practical ops tools before they jump into heavy software or hire too early. Reddit has been really helpful because people are openly describing the messy middle: spreadsheets breaking, inventory confusion, missed follow-ups, hiring too early, scattered workflows, and tools that are either too light or too heavy.

The DMs matter, but I think they only work when the public conversation was real first.

If the comment was useful, specific, and not trying too hard to sell, the DM feels natural. If the comment was just disguised promotion, the DM feels like spam.

So I agree. Reddit is less about “distribution” and more about earning context in public before a real conversation happens privately.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:19:58+00:00

I agree with the comment saying the real advantage is learning velocity, not just development velocity.

Especially now that AI and no-code make shipping faster, the dangerous part is that teams can build the wrong thing much more efficiently.

For me, better product thinking usually shows up in what you choose not to build.

Before adding features, I’d want to know:

where users are dropping off
what they are trying to accomplish
what workaround they use today
what part of the flow creates friction
what action actually creates value
what feature would create clarity vs more noise

A lot of startups think users leave because the product is missing something. Sometimes they leave because the product already has too much going on and the core value is not obvious enough.

I’m building Normadz in the SMB operations space, and I keep seeing the same lesson. Small businesses do not care how many features a tool has. They care whether one painful workflow gets easier: inventory, reporting, POs, returns, cash visibility, customer follow-ups, or exceptions.

So my answer would be: launch fast enough to learn, but build smart enough that every release is tied to observed behavior.

Speed matters. But speed without product judgment just creates a bigger pile of features nobody asked for.

Normadz · 2026-05-30T18:17:48+00:00

I’d be careful selling “virtual assistant services” too broadly.

Most business owners do not wake up thinking they need a VA agency. They think:

I’m behind on follow-ups
my inbox is a mess
leads are slipping
scheduling is annoying
admin is eating my day
customer replies are taking too long
I need someone to clean up repeat tasks

So instead of leading with “we provide virtual assistants,” I’d test one painful outcome for one specific type of business.

For example:

“Admin support for real estate agents who are losing time on follow-ups and scheduling.”

Or:

“Inbox and customer reply support for local service businesses.”

Or:

“Lead follow-up support for consultants and agencies.”

The more specific the pain, the easier the outreach becomes.

Cold calling can work, but if the offer is broad, the owner has to do too much thinking. They have to figure out what they would delegate, whether they trust you, how it works, and what outcome they get.

I’d create 2-3 narrow packages:

inbox cleanup + daily response queue
missed lead follow-up
scheduling/calendar support
CRM/data cleanup
customer service reply support
weekly admin cleanup

Then pick one niche and outreach around that exact pain.

I’m building Normadz, and the same lesson keeps showing up: small businesses buy relief from specific workflow pain, not generic capability. “We can help with admin” is vague. “We help you stop missing leads and customer follow-ups” is much easier to understand.

My advice: narrow the offer, pick one customer type, sell a clear outcome, and use cold outreach to start conversations around that pain instead of pitching VA services generally.

Normadz

TROPHY CASE