To clarify, I don’t think the problem itself failed, there’s definitely demand for better workflow aggregation. Like you said, companies have succeeded in that space. But in my case, the way I approached it, the execution, timing, and maybe even the target audience, didn't gain traction. I took the lack of interest as a signal that my specific take on the solution wasn’t compelling enough, at least in the way I was presenting it.
Maybe a different approach could have worked, and in hindsight, I could’ve explored other ways to validate it instead of relying on a newsletter signup as my primary gauge. That’s a great point.
And yeah, the original problem does exist. I guess my real lesson was not just about assuming a problem existed but making sure I was the right person to solve it in a way that people actually wanted.
If you’re curious, the old landing page is still up: https://brieflytics.vercel.app/. I’d love any thoughts on what I could have done differently there.
Also, my new project, GM Pro, is tackling a problem I validated firsthand—improving Google Meet with features like better chat UI, reactions, persisted messages, and transcriptions. You can check it out here: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gm-pro/bfmgohplnhbl....
I've also seen some competition in the Google Meet extensions space, products like FellowApp, Spinach, and others, so I already know the idea is valid and there's a market for it
Would love to hear any feedback, whether on the old idea, the new one, or just thoughts on startup validation in general!