u/Veshal_

So i have been sending LinkedIn outbound for a couple months now for a B2B SaaS thing I'm building, and I'm starting to wonder if I'm overthinking the message itself instead of fixing something more basic. because mine tend to run longer as I feel like I need to explain the whole value prop upfront, but I also keep seeing advice that shorter and lower-friction gets better replies, which i think i am kinda scared to execute as i might burn the lead and close a door that would otherwise have become a potential client, which is super frustrating.

For people who've actually tracked this, what has actually worked for you, message length, the specific ask, timing, something else entirely?

Also want to know if anyone has tested a soft ask like offering a quick loom video or voice note instead of straight up asking for 15-30 minutes for a demo on a first message?

looking for advice from outside strict B2B SaaS too if the underlying lesson carries over.
Trying to figure out if my approach is wrong here.

So i have been sending LinkedIn outbound for a couple months now for a B2B SaaS thing I'm building, and I'm starting to wonder if I'm overthinking the message itself instead of fixing something more basic. because mine tend to run longer as I feel like I need to explain the whole value prop upfront, but I also keep seeing advice that shorter and lower-friction gets better replies, which i think i am kinda scared to execute as i might burn the lead and close a door that would otherwise have become a potential client, which is super frustrating.

For people who've actually tracked this, what has actually worked for you, message length, the specific ask, timing, something else entirely?

Also want to know if anyone has tested a soft ask like offering a quick loom video or voice note instead of straight up asking for 15-30 minutes for a demo on a first message?

looking for advice from outside strict B2B SaaS too if the underlying lesson carries over.
Trying to figure out if my approach is wrong here.

We built something that serves a market the bigger players in this space never really went after. Tools like Klue, Crayon, Gong, they're not exact comparisons since they do a lot more on the integrations and compliance side, but they're the closest reference points we have. Those start anywhere from 15k to 50k a year plus depending on the deal, and a lot of that reflects real custom work and enterprise requirements. Fair enough. But a chunk of it also reflects a pre Artificial Intelligence assumption, that delivering this kind of value takes a certain amount of manual labour and infrastructure. That assumption doesn't fully hold anymore. today a lot of that gap is closed. So I don't think their pricing is fully justified today for what it actually costs to deliver similar value at a smaller scale.

That logic cuts both ways though. We're at $200 a month flat right now, no seat limit. If I hold our own team to the same standard, not charging for effort that modern tech has made cheaper, then what should we actually be charging. Part of me thinks $200 is smart pricing for an underserved segment. Part of me thinks it's just underpricing wearing a strategy costume.

Honestly the most straightforward move would be asking our own customers what they'd pay, but I keep talking myself out of it. Feels like opening that conversation risks planting doubt where there wasn't any before. Not sure if that's a real risk or just me avoiding an uncomfortable ask.

Anybody else been through this when building your Saas? Feels like a problem specific to this moment and not something the usual pricing advice really covers.

We built something that serves a market the bigger players in this space never really went after. Tools like Klue, Crayon, Gong, they're not exact comparisons since they do a lot more on the integrations and compliance side, but they're the closest reference points we have. Those start anywhere from 15k to 50k a year plus depending on the deal, and a lot of that reflects real custom work and enterprise requirements. Fair enough. But a chunk of it also reflects a pre Artificial Intelligence assumption, that delivering this kind of value takes a certain amount of manual labour and infrastructure. That assumption doesn't fully hold anymore. today a lot of that gap is closed. So I don't think their pricing is fully justified today for what it actually costs to deliver similar value at a smaller scale.

That logic cuts both ways though. We're at $200 a month flat right now, no seat limit. If I hold our own team to the same standard, not charging for effort that modern tech has made cheaper, then what should we actually be charging. Part of me thinks $200 is smart pricing for an underserved segment. Part of me thinks it's just underpricing wearing a strategy costume.

Honestly the most straightforward move would be asking our own customers what they'd pay, but I keep talking myself out of it. Feels like opening that conversation risks planting doubt where there wasn't any before. Not sure if that's a real risk or just me avoiding an uncomfortable ask.

Anybody else been through this when building your Saas? Feels like a problem specific to this moment and not something the usual pricing advice really covers.

We built something that serves a market the bigger players in this space never really went after. Tools like Klue, Crayon, Gong, they're not exact comparisons since they do a lot more on the integrations and compliance side, but they're the closest reference points we have. Those start anywhere from 15k to 50k a year plus depending on the deal, and a lot of that reflects real custom work and enterprise requirements. Fair enough. But a chunk of it also reflects a pre-AI assumption, that delivering this kind of value takes a certain amount of manual labour and infrastructure. That assumption doesn't fully hold anymore. AI has closed a lot of that gap. So I don't think their pricing is fully justified today for what it actually costs to deliver similar value at a smaller scale.

That logic cuts both ways though. We're at $200 a month flat right now, no seat limit. If I hold our own team to the same standard, not charging for effort that AI has made cheaper, then what should we actually be charging. Part of me thinks $200 is smart pricing for an underserved segment. Part of me thinks it's just underpricing wearing a strategy costume.

Honestly the most straightforward move would be asking our own customers what they'd pay, but I keep talking myself out of it. Feels like opening that conversation risks planting doubt where there wasn't any before. Not sure if that's a real risk or just me avoiding an uncomfortable ask.

Curious if other people building in this AI shift are running into the same thing? Feels like a problem specific to this moment and not something the usual pricing advice really covers.

Hey everyone, looking for some honest perspective from founders who are actively competing against bigger players right now.
A bit of context: I run BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform. We built it strictly for larger B2B SaaS companies that have dedicated product marketing departments and massive sales teams. It is an enterprise tool.

Recently I posted a bit about our workflow on Reddit, and my inbox unexpectedly filled up with messages from early stage founders. These are teams of maybe 5 to 20 people, sometimes just the founder doing founder led sales, asking if we have a light or startup friendly version of our platform.

Honestly, my immediate gut reaction was that startups don't need this. The massive tools in this space like Klue or Crayon cost 20k to 40k a year because they assume you have a full time analyst managing them. A scrappy founder doesn't have time for that.
But the messages made me pause. It got me wondering how early stage teams actually manage competitive intelligence when they are actively losing deals to incumbents.

If you are a founder with a small sales team, how do you actually keep track of competitor moves, feature updates, or pricing shifts without it turning into a chaotic Google Doc that everyone forgets to update? Do you even bother building battlecards or objection sheets for your reps, or do you just wing it on sales calls and hope for the best?

I am trying to figure out if there is a genuinely painful problem to solve here for smaller headcounts, or if it is just a nice to have that startups talk about but would never actually budget for. If you have been in this spot, how did you handle it, and at what point did competitor tracking actually become a priority for you?

Hey everyone, looking for some honest perspective from founders who are actively competing against bigger players right now.

A bit of context: I run BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform. We built it strictly for larger B2B SaaS companies that have dedicated product marketing departments and massive sales teams. It is an enterprise tool.

Recently I posted a bit about our workflow on Reddit, and my inbox unexpectedly filled up with messages from early stage founders. These are teams of maybe 5 to 20 people, sometimes just the founder doing founder led sales, asking if we have a light or startup friendly version of our platform.

Honestly, my immediate gut reaction was that startups don't need this. The massive tools in this space like Klue or Crayon cost 20k to 40k a year because they assume you have a full time analyst managing them. A scrappy founder doesn't have time for that.

But the messages made me pause. It got me wondering how early stage teams actually manage competitive intelligence when they are actively losing deals to incumbents.
If you are a founder with a small sales team, how do you actually keep track of competitor moves, feature updates, or pricing shifts without it turning into a chaotic Google Doc that everyone forgets to update? Do you even bother building battlecards or objection sheets for your reps, or do you just wing it on sales calls and hope for the best?

I am trying to figure out if there is a genuinely painful problem to solve here for smaller headcounts, or if it is just a nice to have that startups talk about but would never actually budget for. If you have been in this spot, how did you handle it, and at what point did competitor tracking actually become a priority for you?

My service was built for companies with dedicated sales and product teams, turns out founders want it too and i dont know what to do.

So a bit of context: I built BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform designed for larger B2B SaaS companies—the kind that have dedicated product marketing and big sales teams.

But recently, I posted a bit about it on Reddit, and my inbox kind of blew up with questions from early-stage founders. These are guys who are right in the thick of competing, maybe have a tiny sales team (or are doing founder-led sales), and they're asking if there’s a version of this that’s friendly for smaller headcounts.
It got me thinking, and I wanted to honestly check the pulse of the community here.

Does a lighter, unified platform like this actually make sense for a startup? I'm talking about something that:

Tracks competitor activity and pings you with real intel the second they make a move.

Feeds directly into your sales loop with dynamic battlecards and quick objection-handling guides so a small sales team (or you) can punch above their weight.

Helps leadership refine GTM strategy by tracking and analyzing exactly which deals competitors are showing up in, why you're winning or losing them, and how to position better next time.

The tools that exist Klue, Crayon etc cost $20-40K a year and are built for enterprise teams with a dedicated CI analyst sitting around all day making battlecards. Not exactly realistic for a 5-20 person company where the founder is also doing sales, product, support, and probably making coffee.

So my questions for the founders here are:
How are you handling this right now?
Is it just a messy Google Doc of competitor notes that gets outdated in a week? Slacking screenshots to each other? Or are you just winging it during sales calls?

Is there an actual painful problem to solve here, or do small teams just not care enough about deep competitor tracking to pay for it?

Realistically, if something like this was directly tied to saving your pipeline and helping you win high-ticket deals, what would you actually be willing to pay for it monthly/annually?

Would love some brutal honesty on this. If it's a real pain point, I'd love to scope out a startup-friendly version, but if it's a "nice to have" that people wouldn't budget for, tell me straight!

My service was built for companies with dedicated sales and product teams, turns out founders want it too and i dont know what to do.

So a bit of context: I built BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform designed for larger B2B SaaS companies—the kind that have dedicated product marketing and big sales teams.

But recently, I posted a bit about it on Reddit, and my inbox kind of blew up with questions from early-stage founders. These are guys who are right in the thick of competing, maybe have a tiny sales team (or are doing founder-led sales), and they're asking if there’s a version of this that’s friendly for smaller headcounts.
It got me thinking, and I wanted to honestly check the pulse of the community here.

Does a lighter, unified platform like this actually make sense for a startup? I'm talking about something that:

Tracks competitor activity and pings you with real intel the second they make a move.

Feeds directly into your sales loop with dynamic battlecards and quick objection-handling guides so a small sales team (or you) can punch above their weight.

Helps leadership refine GTM strategy by tracking and analyzing exactly which deals competitors are showing up in, why you're winning or losing them, and how to position better next time.

The tools that exist Klue, Crayon etc cost $20-40K a year and are built for enterprise teams with a dedicated CI analyst sitting around all day making battlecards. Not exactly realistic for a 5-20 person company where the founder is also doing sales, product, support, and probably making coffee.

So my questions for the founders here are:
How are you handling this right now?
Is it just a messy Google Doc of competitor notes that gets outdated in a week? Slacking screenshots to each other? Or are you just winging it during sales calls?

Is there an actual painful problem to solve here, or do small teams just not care enough about deep competitor tracking to pay for it?

Realistically, if something like this was directly tied to saving your pipeline and helping you win high-ticket deals, what would you actually be willing to pay for it monthly/annually?

Would love some brutal honesty on this. If it's a real pain point, I'd love to scope out a startup-friendly version, but if it's a "nice to have" that people wouldn't budget for, tell me straight!

My service was built for companies with dedicated sales and product teams, turns out founders want it too and i dont know what to do.

So a bit of context: I built BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform designed for larger B2B SaaS companies with dedicated product marketing and big sales teams.
But recently, I posted a bit about it on Reddit and my inbox kind of blew up with questions from early stage founders. These are folks right in the thick of competing, maybe running a tiny sales team or just doing founder led sales, and they are asking if there is a version of this friendly for smaller headcounts. It got me thinking, and I wanted to honestly check the pulse of the community here.

Does a lighter, unified platform like this actually make sense for a startup? I am talking about something that tracks competitor activity and pings you with real intel the second they make a move, feeds directly into your sales loop with dynamic battlecards and quick objection handling guides, and helps you analyze exactly which deals competitors are showing up in so you can position better and win more.
The tools that exist like Klue or Crayon cost 20k to 40k a year and are built for enterprise teams with a dedicated analyst sitting around all day making battlecards. That is not exactly realistic for a 5 to 20 person company where the founder is wearing five different hats.

So my questions for the founders here are pretty simple. How are you handling this right now? Is it just a messy Google Doc of competitor notes that gets outdated in a week, slacking screenshots to each other, or are you just winging it during sales calls?

Is there an actual painful problem to solve here, or do small teams just not care enough about deep competitor tracking to pay for it? And realistically, if something like this was directly tied to saving your pipeline and helping you win high ticket deals, what would you actually be willing to pay for it?

Would love some brutal honesty on this. If it is a real pain point, I would love to scope out a startup friendly version, but if it is just a nice to have that people wouldn't budget for, tell me straight.

My service was built for companies with dedicated sales and product teams, turns out founders want it too and i dont know what to do.

So a bit of context: I built BridgeStag, which is a competitive intelligence platform designed for larger B2B SaaS companies with dedicated product marketing and big sales teams.
But recently, I posted a bit about it on Reddit and my inbox kind of blew up with questions from early stage founders. These are folks right in the thick of competing, maybe running a tiny sales team or just doing founder led sales, and they are asking if there is a version of this friendly for smaller headcounts. It got me thinking, and I wanted to honestly check the pulse of the community here.

Does a lighter, unified platform like this actually make sense for a startup? I am talking about something that tracks competitor activity and pings you with real intel the second they make a move, feeds directly into your sales loop with dynamic battlecards and quick objection handling guides, and helps you analyze exactly which deals competitors are showing up in so you can position better and win more.
The tools that exist like Klue or Crayon cost 20k to 40k a year and are built for enterprise teams with a dedicated analyst sitting around all day making battlecards. That is not exactly realistic for a 5 to 20 person company where the founder is wearing five different hats.

So my questions for the founders here are pretty simple. How are you handling this right now? Is it just a messy Google Doc of competitor notes that gets outdated in a week, slacking screenshots to each other, or are you just winging it during sales calls?

Is there an actual painful problem to solve here, or do small teams just not care enough about deep competitor tracking to pay for it? And realistically, if something like this was directly tied to saving your pipeline and helping you win high ticket deals, what would you actually be willing to pay for it?

Would love some brutal honesty on this. If it is a real pain point, I would love to scope out a startup friendly version, but if it is just a nice to have that people wouldn't budget for, tell me straight.

📍Day 3.

Working on weekends has not really been that bad honestly. Some of the best ideas come when the psychological burden of weekday anxiety is not sitting on your chest.

Could the weekend have been more productive? Yes. But something is always better than nothing and I am learning to be okay with that.

Something interesting happened though.

I was going through comments on Reddit from people who had seen BridgeStag and I noticed something I did not expect. Regular people were curious. Not just startup founders or product marketers. Just ordinary curious people asking basic questions about what we do.

And it hit me, I had been writing for specialists. Using language that assumed the reader already understood why tracking competitors matters. But a regular person stumbling onto the site had no idea why any of it was important.

Which got me thinking about something bigger.

Market / Competitive intelligence has always been expensive. Time consuming. Something only large companies with dedicated teams could afford to take seriously. So most startups just ignore it and hope for the best.

But is that about to change?

With AI changing how research works, is market / competitive intelligence transitioning from a nice-to-have to a must-have? Something every serious startup (the ones with early traction at least) needs to survive and grow?

I think so. But I want to know what you think.

Is this something you have ever taken seriously or does it always end up at the bottom of the list?

Day 3. Still here.

📍Day 3.

Working on weekends has not really been that bad honestly. Some of the best ideas come when the psychological burden of weekday anxiety is not sitting on your chest.

Could the weekend have been more productive? Yes. But something is always better than nothing and I am learning to be okay with that.

Something interesting happened though.

I was going through comments on Reddit from people who had seen BridgeStag and I noticed something I did not expect. Regular people were curious. Not just startup founders or product marketers. Just ordinary curious people asking basic questions about what we do.

And it hit me, I had been writing for specialists. Using language that assumed the reader already understood why tracking competitors matters. But a regular person stumbling onto the site had no idea why any of it was important.

Which got me thinking about something bigger.

Market / Competitive intelligence has always been expensive. Time consuming. Something only large companies with dedicated teams could afford to take seriously. So most startups just ignore it and hope for the best.

But is that about to change?

With AI changing how research works, is market / competitive intelligence transitioning from a nice-to-have to a must-have? Something every serious startup (the ones with early traction at least) needs to survive and grow?

I think so. But I want to know what you think.

Is this something you have ever taken seriously or does it always end up at the bottom of the list?

Day 3. Still here.

Day 2.

Yesterday I lied in my first post. Said I had one month of runway left. Half of you probably came to watch the car crash.

What actually happened after that post surprised me.

I posted on Reddit last night. Woke up to comments, conversations, and two meetings booked. Not buyers. Probably founders in the same boat as me. But real human beings who read what I wrote and said yes I want to talk.

That hasn’t happened in months of cold outreach.

Which made me think.

I’ve been so obsessed with the perfect DM, the perfect sequence, the perfect funnel that I forgot people respond to people. Not templates.

But here’s the thing that’s really been sitting with me today.
I do competitive intelligence for B2B SaaS PMMs.
And outreach has made me ask myself a genuinely uncomfortable question.

Are some PMMs so attached to competitive intelligence as a function that outsourcing it feels like admitting weakness?
Like asking someone to write your emails for you. Technically efficient. Emotionally threatening.
Because CI isn’t just a task for a good PMM. It’s how they prove they understand the market. It’s part of their identity.

So when I show up and say “let us do that for you” am I solving a problem or poking an ego?

And then I think about the VP sitting above that PMM.

They don’t care who does the CI. They care whether the team knew about the competitor move before it cost them a deal.
Two completely different conversations. Same product.

If you’re a PMM, honestly, what does ideal competitive intelligence look like for you at work? Is it something you’d ever outsource or does that feel wrong?

If you’re in leadership, do you even know how your team is tracking competitors right now?

Drop it in the comments.
I’m genuinely asking.

Day 2. Still here.

I started this business 8 months ago thinking I was a genius. Today I have exactly one month of runway left before I am completely broke, forced to quit, and have to admit building a startup was a massive mistake.

I am not going to sit here and blame the tech market or the economy. Thats what cowards do. The truth is much more embarrassing.

The grand illusion of entrepreneurship is that the hardest part is building the product. Its a comforting lie.

When I launched BridgeStag, the goal was clear to deliver competitive intelligence to B2B SaaS PMMs the way it should actually work. Not noise. Not a feed of updates you have to interpret yourself. Intelligence the way it was meant to be. Like a whisper in a Kings ear.

Then it hit me. B2B high-ticket sales.
It is hard and when I say hard I mean it is embarrassingly hard. Looking back there is no way my older self could even realize what "hard" actually means. Its been a brutal reality check, especially for someone whose ego constantly tells him he is cut out for entrepreneurship.

Building a business is hard, but keeping it alive is harder and in some ways you need to kill a part of yourself so that your business can live and that’s exactly what I’m doing here.
I used to always convince myself that building in public wasnt for serious founders real geniuses build in silence. But turns out thats a lie I have been telling myself maybe because I am terrified of public humiliation.

But hold on. I can use that fear to my advantage. If I commit to building in public the fear of failure wont even let me sleep until I win. If I have to humiliate myself publicly to make BridgeStag succeed, I will do it. Thats the only accountability system that works for someone like me.
My purpose and vision are way stronger than my weaknesses, and I am willing to do whatever it takes.

I will be building Bridgestag completely in public for the next 30 days and I will keep you posted on my progress every single day.

And that part up there where I said I have one month left before I quit?
I was lying.
I just wanted to see who would show up to watch the car crash. The truth is, even if the runway hits absolute zero, I will sleep on floors, eat dirt, face a thousand more public humiliations, and do whatever the hell it takes to make BridgeStag work.
I am not going anywhere.
Day 1 starts now.

I started this business 8 months ago thinking I was a genius. Today I have exactly one month of runway left before I am completely broke, forced to quit, and have to admit building a startup was a massive mistake.

I am not going to sit here and blame the tech market or the economy. Thats what cowards do. The truth is much more embarrassing.

The grand illusion of entrepreneurship is that the hardest part is building the product. Its a comforting lie.

When I launched BridgeStag, the goal was clear to deliver competitive intelligence to B2B SaaS PMMs the way it should actually work. Not noise. Not a feed of updates you have to interpret yourself. Intelligence the way it was meant to be. Like a whisper in a Kings ear.

Then it hit me. B2B high-ticket sales.
It is hard and when I say hard I mean it is embarrassingly hard. Looking back there is no way my older self could even realize what "hard" actually means. Its been a brutal reality check, especially for someone whose ego constantly tells him he is cut out for entrepreneurship.

Building a business is hard, but keeping it alive is harder and in some ways you need to kill a part of yourself so that your business can live and that’s exactly what I’m doing here.
I used to always convince myself that building in public wasnt for serious founders real geniuses build in silence. But turns out thats a lie I have been telling myself maybe because I am terrified of public humiliation.

But hold on. I can use that fear to my advantage. If I commit to building in public the fear of failure wont even let me sleep until I win. If I have to humiliate myself publicly to make BridgeStag succeed, I will do it. Thats the only accountability system that works for someone like me.
My purpose and vision are way stronger than my weaknesses, and I am willing to do whatever it takes.

I will be building Bridgestag completely in public for the next 30 days and I will keep you posted on my progress every single day.

And that part up there where I said I have one month left before I quit?
I was lying.
I just wanted to see who would show up to watch the car crash. The truth is, even if the runway hits absolute zero, I will sleep on floors, eat dirt, face a thousand more public humiliations, and do whatever the hell it takes to make BridgeStag work.
I am not going anywhere.
Day 1 starts now.

I started this business 8 months ago thinking I was a genius. Today I have exactly one month of runway left before I am completely broke, forced to quit, and have to admit building a startup was a massive mistake.

I am not going to sit here and blame the tech market or the economy. Thats what cowards do. The truth is much more embarrassing.

The grand illusion of entrepreneurship is that the hardest part is building the product. Its a comforting lie.

When I launched BridgeStag, the goal was clear to deliver competitive intelligence to B2B SaaS PMMs the way it should actually work. Not noise. Not a feed of updates you have to interpret yourself. Intelligence the way it was meant to be. Like a whisper in a Kings ear.

Then it hit me. B2B high-ticket sales.
It is hard and when I say hard I mean it is embarrassingly hard. Looking back there is no way my older self could even realize what "hard" actually means. Its been a brutal reality check, especially for someone whose ego constantly tells him he is cut out for entrepreneurship.

Building a business is hard, but keeping it alive is harder and in some ways you need to kill a part of yourself so that your business can live and that’s exactly what I’m doing here.
I used to always convince myself that building in public wasnt for serious founders real geniuses build in silence. But turns out thats a lie I have been telling myself maybe because I am terrified of public humiliation.

But hold on. I can use that fear to my advantage. If I commit to building in public the fear of failure wont even let me sleep until I win. If I have to humiliate myself publicly to make BridgeStag succeed, I will do it. Thats the only accountability system that works for someone like me.
My purpose and vision are way stronger than my weaknesses, and I am willing to do whatever it takes.

I will be building Bridgestag completely in public for the next 30 days and I will keep you posted on my progress every single day.

And that part up there where I said I have one month left before I quit?
I was lying.
I just wanted to see who would show up to watch the car crash. The truth is, even if the runway hits absolute zero, I will sleep on floors, eat dirt, face a thousand more public humiliations, and do whatever the hell it takes to make BridgeStag work.
I am not going anywhere.
Day 1 starts now.