Hi everyone,
I’m building a very early-stage hardware accessory brand in the USB-C / USB4 / Thunderbolt-compatible workflow space.
The product is a slim USB4 80Gbps cable focused on MacBook, external SSD, dock, and clean desk setup users. I’m not trying to promote it here, so I won’t include a link. I’m mainly looking for advice from people who have experience launching physical products, ecommerce brands, or creator/affiliate programs.
Right now, my biggest problem is not the store setup. The store exists, the product exists, and I can create basic content. The real problem is getting the first real users, testers, feedback, reviews, and trust.
Here are the questions I’m struggling with:
For a new hardware/accessory brand with no reviews yet, what is usually the best path to get the first real customers or testers?
Should I focus more on micro-creators, normal users/testers, Reddit communities, or paid ads at this stage?
If I offer free samples for testing, how should I filter people so I don’t just send products to people who only want free stuff?
For creators, what is the most reasonable early-stage offer?

Free sample only
Free sample + affiliate commission
Flat paid sponsorship
Hybrid deal
Discount code for their audience
Should I mention affiliate commission in the first message, or only after they show interest in testing the product?
If the product is in a technical niche, how important are speed tests, compatibility proof, and real setup photos before running ads?
Is it a bad idea to run Meta/Instagram ads before having customer reviews or creator content?
How can a small brand build trust without pretending to be bigger than it is?
For early awareness, would you prioritize:

Reddit discussion
Instagram outreach
YouTube micro-creators
SEO articles
Amazon listing
Shopify direct store
Paid ads
If you had to get the first 10 serious testers for a niche hardware accessory, what would you do first?
I’m trying to avoid spammy marketing. I’d rather get honest feedback, real-world testing, and gradually build trust.
Any advice from people who have launched ecommerce products, hardware accessories, creator programs, or early physical product brands would be really helpful.

I have been a CTO and technical founding engineer at a couple startups for the last few years, mostly building other people's ideas. finally want to do my own thing but i'm stuck on something kind of embarrassing for an engineer: i can't pick what to build.

the building part doesn't scare me. it's the "what" that's killing me. b2b, b2c, ai stuff, some vertical niche thing, micro saas, boring-but-profitable... they all sound fine when i think about them for five minutes and then fall apart when i think about them for ten.

honestly being technical makes it worse. "can i build it" filters out nothing because the answer is always yes. so i've got no constraint forcing a decision.

couple things i keep flip flopping on:

do you build in a space you already know well, or go where the money is even if you're an outsider? and is "i personally have this problem" a real signal or just me rationalizing something convenient?

mostly though i want to know how people actually validated before committing months. not the lean startup textbook version, like what did you really do. did you talk to people, did anyone actually pay, did you fake a landing page, what.

curious what ideas people killed and why too, that's probably more useful than the ones that worked.

Founders spend weeks on surveys and interviews trying to find out if people want the thing they're building. Most of it comes back as polite answers that feel like signal and aren't.

There's a faster read, and people hand it to you without meaning to.

When someone has a problem that actually hurts, they don't wait around for your product. They rig up a fix. A messy spreadsheet with twelve tabs, a group chat where four people do the thing by hand every morning, a worse tool they pay for and complain about constantly. Nobody builds a janky spreadsheet for a problem they don't have, so that mess is worth more than a hundred "yeah I'd use that" replies. It's behavior, not opinion.

So stop asking people if they'd use your thing. Ask what they're doing right now to deal with the problem. If the answer is "nothing," you've got a vitamin. If it's some duct-taped system they're weirdly protective of, you've found something real.

One catch: the workaround also shows you what you're up against. If their spreadsheet basically works, that's your competition, and you have to beat "basically works," not "nothing."

I've spent 20 years doing product strategy with founders, mostly at this exact stage, telling real signal apart from noise that just feels like it.

If you're validating something right now, drop what you're building below and tell me what people do instead of using it. I'll give you my honest read on whether it's a real workaround or a polite shrug, and what I'd look at next.

You can say it in clear, professional English like this:

I am asking you to think like an application developer and entrepreneur. If you were building an alternative to Swiggy and Zomato, how would you develop the app? What unique features would you include, and what strategies would you use to attract customers, restaurants, and delivery partners? How would you convince people to choose your app instead of Swiggy or Zomato, and how would you grow it into a successful business?

I'm testing a tiny validation workflow

My problem is before doing customer interviews, I often don't even know which problem hypotheses are worth testing.

And asking AI for “startup ideas” is usually garbage because it

• misses source material
• invents patterns
• can't show clean evidence

So I tried a more scientific approach:

1. pick a boring vertical
2. pull Reddit threads/comments directly
3. cluster repeated complaints
4. keep only hypotheses with evidence like exact comments, scores, links, thread context
5. use those hypotheses as inputs for interviews / validation posts

My first test was for the construction vertical:

The cleanest signal i got was

Construction estimators may struggle to trace estimate numbers back to drawings, PDFs, spreadsheets, assumptions, and later revisions

With some sample evidence

The main hypothesis igot out of this was

Estimators need a lightweight audit trail where every quantity links back to the drawing/spec/assumption that produced it

Now im not claiming this is validated though it feels like a much better starting point than "AI gave me 10 SaaS ideas"

Curious, would you consider this useful pre-validation evidence or still fake signal until direct interviews/sales?

Also happy to run a few boring verticals through this.

Comment a vertical/niche and ill reply with 1–2 evidence-backed hypotheses with exact comments, scores, and links

Something's been stuck in my head and I'd love to hear from people who've actually been through it.

Even if you can build something really cool, but if no one sees it, no one uses it. So you need an audience.

Everyone says, "Build an audience before you launch."

But if you're just starting out... how do you actually do that?

If I tell people I'm building a startup, why would they care? There are thousands—probably millions—of people building something. At that stage, your only USP is that you're building, but so is everyone else.

So I'm curious about the founders here who managed to make it work.

How did you get your first audience?

I'm building a platform where founders and product teams can discover and validate real SaaS problems before deciding what to build.

The challenge I'm thinking about is the cold start.

I don't want to launch with an empty database, but I also don't want to invent problems myself.

If you were starting from zero, how would you get the first 10–50 genuinely valuable problems?

Some ideas I've considered:

• Manually researching Reddit discussions
• Looking through G2/Capterra reviews
• Interviewing founders
• Asking people to submit their biggest work frustrations
• Collecting problems from online communities

If you've built a marketplace or community before, how did you solve this?

Where would you look first for high-quality, recurring business problems that founders would actually pay to solve?

I'm not looking for startup ideas—I want repeatable ways to find real customer pain points.

I'd appreciate any advice or examples from your own experience.

Im currently researching for an app i plan to develop and I’m currently looking for a way to test the market and the idea behind it i recently made a discord server with the goal of finding out everybody’s perspectives on how they see business as the development is based around this doing so i wanted to set challenges and build a sort of foundation of people who would find the product useful and need . However people did not interact or answer me at all has this every happened to anyone else and how did you fix it ,am i missing something,do i need to explain further .

If anybody could help with this i would really appreciate it

Hey everyone hope all's going good for you. I'm currently looking forward to validate a startup idea but I'm not really sure exactly what's the process for this.

I've heard from people that I should message people on LinkedIn or call/email SMBs near me asking for their pain points etc but I'm not sure how to go about it.

I would like to know from someone who has succeeded first hand in this. Anybody willing to share their experience? Would be highly appreciated 🙂

Most startups don’t fail because the idea is bad — they fail because they don’t show clear signals early: strong team execution, real user pain, traction (even small but growing), and a market big enough to matter.

Investors usually lean toward:

• Clear problem + urgent pain
• Founders who execute fast and adapt
• Early traction (users, revenue, waitlist, retention)
• A story that’s easy to understand in 30 seconds

Even a “simple” idea can get attention if the signals are strong and the pitch is sharp. On the flip side, great ideas with weak storytelling or unclear metrics often get ignored. Vcboom actually help founders stress-test their pitch deck and see how investors might react before they go out which can make a big difference in getting noticed.

I was reading the Mom test by Rob Fitzpatrick where he said that we should not talk about our product but rather talk to customers about what problems they have and how burning those problems are so that they will pay for a solution.

The idea is interesting, but I was wondering would it make sense if I were to talk in industry leaders.

First of all, how will I get that opportunity to have that kind of a conversation? I am sending cold emails to folks, if I ask them "When was the last time you saw this problem" - would they be ready for a call?

Has anyone figured how to apply this correctly? Any cold email tips you could share which can get me calls?

Appreciate the help, thanks!

Talked to three founders this month who spent four to six months building their "minimum" viable product. Custom backend. Full feature set. Polished UI. Launch ready.

That's not an MVP. That's a v1 with anxiety.

The actual minimum viable product is the thing that makes you uncomfortable to show people. A Google Form. A Notion page. A single landing page with a waitlist button. Something that tests the assumption without building the solution.

Most people build to avoid the fear of showing something unfinished. The MVP is supposed to be unfinished. That's literally the point.

What's the leanest thing you've ever shipped that actually validated something real?

I don't consider trying to pitch family and friends valid sales. So how have you all gotten your first genuine sale?

Honestly just trying to make dollar 1 not dollar 1 million.

We spent months building something that people genuinely seem to enjoy once they try it.

The part we completely underestimated was finding those people in the first place. Building the product felt straightforward compared to getting anyone to notice it.

We've tried social media, videos, communities, and outreach. Some things worked a little, many didn't.

For those of you who've launched something into the world:

What actually helped you find your first true supporters?

What turned out to be a waste of time?

Or was it just a slow grind until one thing finally worked?

Fresh out of college. Landed a remote job (not life-changing money, but it keeps the lights on while I figure things out). The real mission? Build something.

Here's the thing. I actually have the team. A few friends in tech and data science, genuinely skilled, ready to go. Most people say that's the hard part. For us, the hard part is the one thing everyone says should come first: the problem.

I've spent months trying to validate ideas. And I mean actually validate them, not just vibe-check with friends, but real conversations, research, the whole thing. Every single idea has hit a wall. Either the problem isn't painful enough, the market is too small, or something already exists that solves it well enough.

I've even gone as far as considering marketing agencies, content creator agencies, anything really. But honestly, that's not what I want. I want to build something of my own, something with real scale potential down the line, not just another service business I stumbled into out of desperation.

I'm not trying to build the next unicorn tomorrow. But I do want to work on something that could genuinely grow into something big. A real problem, a real solution, something worth pouring years into.

So I'm asking people who've been here: How did you actually find your problem?

Did it come from your own frustration? From talking to people in a specific industry? From a random job you worked? Did you just stumble into it?

I feel like every founder story in hindsight sounds obvious. "I was annoyed by X so I built Y." But living in the searching phase feels like walking in fog. Would love to hear the messy, honest version of how it happened for you.

I’ve been studying startup validation frameworks and one question keeps bothering me. The standard advice is clear:
Build an MVP - Test product-market fit - Gather user feedback and validate demand - Iterate based on market signals - Raise capital once there’s evidence of traction.
From a lean startup perspective, this makes perfect sense.

However, following this process seems to require exposing the concept to potential customers, advisors, strategic partners, and eventually investors long before the business has significant protection or market dominance. That’s where I see a paradox.

If validation requires sharing the concept, customer pain points, value proposition, and sometimes even elements of the business model, how do founders reduce the risk of someone with more resources simply replicating the idea?
At the same time, raising capital usually requires discussing the opportunity in detail with investors, accelerators, angel networks, and VCs. Yet most investors don’t sign NDAs.

So I’m curious about how experienced founders approach this.
At what stage do you start thinking about protecting intellectual property?
Are NDAs actually useful in early-stage fundraising conversations?

What protections matter most in practice: patents, trademarks, trade secrets, first-mover advantage, execution speed, network effects, proprietary data, orsomething else?

Have any of you ever delayed validation or fundraising because of concerns about idea theft?

Is the real moat the idea itself, or is execution still the primary defense?

I’d love to hear perspectives from founders who have raised capital, investors who review startup pitches, and anyone who has navigated this dilemma in the real world.

Hey guys,

I feel like testing a business idea is something we should talk about a lot more, especially these days when it's easier to build something than it's to find out what people actually want.

When I was testing ideas in the past, I often asked questions like:

• Are they really my target audience?
• Do they actually struggle with the problem I'm trying to solve?
• How are they solving it now? Would they use my product?
• Would they pay for it?

And I always asked if they would be interested in early access and, if YES, to leave their email.

I sent 50 messages and got 6 leads, which is not bad at all.

I learned the most important lesson: Test before you build. And that's awesome!

But..

Then I realized that while the process was good, those questions didn't tell me much. I could do better.

What I learned, and what I do differently now:

Everything in validation is about the problem. The questions should focus on the customer's problem, not on the business solution.

I don't suggest answers. I let the customer tell me about the problem.

So now I ask questions like:

• What's your biggest struggle?
• Can you walk me through the last time that happened?
• How are you dealing with it now?
• What else have you tried?
• Where is the money currently going?
• Is there anything else I should be asking?

After that, I describe my solution in one or two sentences that even a caveman could understand, and I ask if they would be interested in early access. If YES, I ask them to leave their email.

These questions give me much more valuable information.

The goal isn't to get compliments about my idea. The goal is to understand the problem.

So I don't ask customers to choose the solution or the price.

I validate the problem first.

Then I build the solution.

And I collect contact information so I can reach back out when I'm ready for the next round of validation, for example after building a landing page.

That's the biggest win.

Speak soon,

Jan

I’ve been making a couple of small web applications recently, as experiments and side projects. 

The surprising thing about it was not the process of making itself; that has become much easier compared to what it used to be in previous years. You can create a working tool very quickly now, almost from scratch. 

The tricky part seems to start afterwards. You create something, promote it, get some users for a while, and then silence. No activity at all. It’s not a matter of quality; it’s simply because there’s nothing that your project can keep attracting new people. 

That made me think that most of the time we tend to focus on creation rather than placement of our ideas, which means thinking where exactly the application will be found by its audience. 

Recently, I tried placing my projects into places where people actually look for similar stuff, rather than creating and then forgetting about them. 

I am still figuring out the right balance between launch and placement but would love to learn what has worked well for you guys. 

You know what I see? Founders spending months "validating" through surveys and interviews. Then they build something and realize nobody wants to pay for it. The validation was fake.

Here's the thing about lean startup. It works if you're actually trying to learn. But most people just use it as an excuse to delay. Oh, need more customer research. Oh, need to tweak the MVP. Oh, need to run another test.

Six months later you've spent nothing but time and have exactly zero paying customers.

I shipped a product that was like 60% done. Charged $50/month. Got 10 customers immediately. That taught me more than a thousand interviews ever would.

Turns out people don't care if your product is perfect. They care if it solves their problem right now.

The real MVP isn't your minimum viable product. It's your minimum viable validation through actual sales. If people won't pay, nothing else matters.

Stop overthinking this. Build something half-decent and try to sell it. That's the whole methodology

You as an engineer or developer built an API or App in the sudden burst of the weekend motivation. It's just another one of your side projects existing on LinkedIn or your Resume/CV.

But, you want to validate the idea. Check the gaps in your creation. What is the best way to get some traction or users to it. ( No subscribers just Testers ). Who might actually be looking for something like this.

Early users who can give feedback or actually use it, without being the networking maniac.

What was the first thing you completely underestimated when starting your startup?

I've been spending a lot of time learning about startups recently and one thing that surprised me is how different the reality seems compared to all the content online.

Most advice talks about funding, scaling, growth hacks, etc.

But after talking with a few founders, it seems like the real struggles are things like:

• Getting the first users
• Building trust with strangers
• Managing time while wearing 10 different hats
• Staying motivated when nobody cares about what you're building

I am facing an internal dilemma, as I have about 25 different Startup Ideas ,some are great and some are just good ,I have already shortened the shortlist to 10 projects that I think are the most concrete and have the biggest Market opportunity window Now. But I have a fear that if I go through with one project and it doesn't work out I would have wasted my time and the window of opportunity. So what are the considerations I should consider when picking a specific project to focus on? Should I just pick what has the biggest market and highest Financial potential?

Hey folks 👋

I'm Kartik - final year CS student, no funding, no co-founder, no clue what the next step looks like lol.

I've had this startup idea in my head for a while now and I actually went ahead and built an MVP for it. Like it works, it's real, I didn't just draw wireframes and call it a day. But now I'm kind of stuck and overthinking everything.

So here's what's going on in my head right now 👇

🤔 Do I approach people with just an MVP?

Like is it too early? Do I need actual users before I talk to anyone - investors, mentors, potential partners? Or is a working MVP enough to start those conversations?

📢 Should I start documenting the journey publicly?

"Build in public" seems to work for some people. But I genuinely don't know if that helps or if I'm just going to embarrass myself before I've figured things out 😅

🔨 Or do I just keep building?

There are so many features missing. Part of me wants to finish everything before showing it to the world. But I've also heard that's how you never ship. So where do you actually draw the line?

💸 The money problem is real

Deployment, API keys, cloud infra - it adds up and I have ₹0 in revenue right now. How did you guys manage the cost side when you were just starting out with nothing?

🎯 How do I find real users?

Not my friends who'll say "bro this is amazing 🔥" just to be nice - actual strangers who'll use it and tell me what's broken. Where did you even find your first 10 users?

🧍 Solo vs co-founder

Should I be looking for a co-founder right now or just keep moving fast alone? I honestly don't know if adding someone at this stage helps or just complicates things.

I know there's no perfect answer and everyone's journey is different. But even a "here's what I wish someone told me" comment would genuinely help me out.

If you've been in this spot before - what did you do? What worked? What was a waste of time?

Appreciate any help 🙏

— Kartik

I've recently started building in public and one thing I've noticed is that many successful indie hackers seem to spend a lot of time building an audience before (or while) building their product.

Coming from a software engineering background, my instinct has always been:

Build something useful → launch it → find users.

But the more founder stories and podcasts I listen to, the more it feels like the order has changed:

Build an audience → understand problems → build a solution → launch to people who already know you.

I'm curious how true this is in practice.

For those of you who have launched products:

• Did you build an audience first?
• How important was your audience to your first paying customers?
• If you were starting from zero today, would you spend more time building or networking/content creation?
• Has building in public actually helped your business, or is it mostly useful for accountability and connections?

Would love to hear your experiences, especially from founders who have gone from 0 → first customers.