—
5
Min
Read
You have the idea, maybe a deck, and a list of investors to email. The real question is how much product you need before those meetings.
AI changed the answer. Almost anyone can ship a working app in a few weeks now, so investors stopped being impressed that it exists. They want to see that people use it, and that it feels better than the alternatives.
This post covers what to build first, the stack I use, how to find and keep early adopters, and what to show when you pitch.
Key Takeaways
A working MVP isn't required for pre-seed, but it turns a promise into proof.
"We built it" is no longer a signal. Real usage and a better experience are.
Build something you already use, with the features you always wished it had.
Pick a simple, popular stack and spend the saved time on UX.
Use onboarding emails as a feedback loop, not just reminders.
Your website and first screen are part of the pitch.
1. Do you need an MVP to raise a pre-seed round?
Not always. Many pre-seed rounds pay for the first build. But a working product makes the conversation shorter, because investors can click through the idea instead of imagining it.
What changed is the bar. When building is cheap, an MVP alone proves very little. Usage proves something: people signing up, coming back, and telling you what's missing.
Ask yourself:
Can I explain the problem in one sentence?
Has anyone outside my circle used it more than once?
Would a clickable prototype answer the investor's biggest doubt?
2. Build something you'd use yourself
The best MVPs start with a founder who already uses products in the category. You know the tools, you know where they fall short, and you've thought "why doesn't it just do this?" more than once.
Start there. Your first features should be the ones you wished for while using similar products. The ones nobody has shipped yet.
This is my strongest opinion on the topic. AI has levelled the field on building. Your competitor can ship the same features in the same few weeks. What they can't copy easily is an experience shaped by someone who actually lives with the problem.
Instead of:
Cloning the market leader's feature list
Adding settings for every edge case
Shipping a generic AI template
Build:
The feature competitors keep ignoring
A first screen that makes sense without a tour
3. What tech stack should a SaaS MVP use?
Pick a popular, boring stack you can hire for later. Investors rarely ask about it at pre-seed. They ask when something breaks.
This is what I use for MVPs and prototypes:
Layer | Tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
Front end | React | Largest hiring pool, and the skills carry over to React Native if you go mobile |
Styling | Tailwind CSS | Fast to build, easy to keep consistent |
UI components | shadcn/ui | Accessible building blocks you own and can restyle |
Auth and database | Firebase | Sign-in and data in one place, no server to manage |
Deployment | Vercel | A preview link for every change, easy to share with users and investors |
One warning: Tailwind and shadcn are also why so many AI-built apps look identical. The stack is a starting point, not a design.
4. Why design matters more now that AI builds the app
Many founders who reach out to me already have something built. The app works. The landing page exists. And both look like every other AI-generated SaaS: same gradient hero, same card grid, same button.
That hurts at the moment that matters most. A visitor deciding whether to pay for a subscription is deciding whether to trust you. A product that feels generic feels risky. A product that feels considered and "pro" puts people at ease.
What I change first:
The homepage headline, so it names the user and the problem
Visual hierarchy, so the first screen has one clear focus
The details people remember: typography, color, empty states, small moments in onboarding
The signup flow, so creating an account takes as few steps as possible
The gap is big. Median SaaS websites turn about 1.4–2.5% of visitors into signups, while top-quartile sites reach 8–15%. Most of that difference is clarity and trust, not traffic.
For example: say your site gets 2,000 visitors a month. At a 2% signup rate, that's 40 new accounts. At 8%, the low end of the top quartile, it's 160. Same traffic, four times the accounts.
5. How do you find and keep your first early adopters?
Go directly to people who have the problem: your network, LinkedIn, the communities where they already complain about it. Aim for 10–20 people who agree to use it and give you honest feedback.
Then focus on keeping them. Industry data says 40–60% of free trial users log in once and never return. That drop-off is where most MVPs quietly stall.
Use onboarding emails as a feedback loop:
Day 1: help them reach the first win
Day 3: point to the feature they haven't tried
Day 7: ask one question: "What almost stopped you from using this?"
Day 30: ask what they'd miss if it disappeared
The replies show you where the experience breaks. Fix those spots in the app, and the next group of users drops off less. Your email sequence becomes your research tool.
For example: take those 160 monthly signups. If half never come back, you keep 80 active users. Bring that drop-off down to 30% and you keep 112. That's 32 more people using the product every month, without paying for a single extra visitor.
6. What should you show investors?
Bring three things.
Add:
A 2-minute demo of one workflow with realistic data
A few honest numbers: visitor-to-signup rate, users still active after 30 days, quotes from early adopters
Investors will visit your site before the meeting. If it looks like a template, they'll assume the product is one too.
Final thoughts
Building an app is no longer the hard part. Building one people choose over the alternatives is.
That comes from using the product yourself, listening to early users, and caring about the details AI skips.
What that gets you:
More visitors turning into accounts
Fewer users dropping off in the first month
A clearer story in the pitch
Proof that people actually want what you built
Project Inquiries
Book a call and walk me through your app and website. I'll show you what makes them look generic, then redesign them to feel pro enough that users subscribe and investors notice.
