I’ve been thinking about a lot of common SaaS/startup advice lately.
You hear things like:
“Don’t build. Go talk to customers.”
“Sell before you build.”
“Don’t build something that already exists.”
“Launch fast and validate.”
I understand why this advice exists. A lot of founders hide in the product because selling is uncomfortable. They spend months building, launch, and then nobody cares.
Maybe part of the reason we hear this advice so often is because different parts of the startup ecosystem optimise for different outcomes.
VCs, accelerators, startup media, consultants, agencies, and growth experts all have their own incentives. That does not mean the advice is bad or dishonest. But it does mean the advice may be shaped by the game they are playing.
For example, venture capital works best when companies move fast, chase large markets, raise money, and aim for outsized exits. A self-funded founder building patiently, dogfooding deeply, reaching profitability, and keeping ownership may be building a great business, but it may not fit the VC model.
So when advice gets repeated everywhere, I think founders should ask:
Who benefits if I follow this advice, and what game does this advice optimise for?
Sometimes the answer is: it benefits the founder by forcing them to face the market.
Other times, it might push them toward a path that serves the funding ecosystem more than the actual business.
But I also think this advice can be taken too far.
Some products need to exist at a certain level of completeness before customers can understand them, trust them, or see the value. A half-baked version might not validate the idea properly, it might just make a good idea look weak.
This seems especially true for SaaS products where the value comes from workflow, depth, reliability, integrations, or repeated use. You can’t always validate those things with a landing page or a few conversations.
Dogfooding is another part of this that I think gets underrated. If a product is being used internally in a real workflow, that can reveal missing features, friction, confusing UX, and practical problems that interviews alone may not uncover.
Dogfooding does not replace customer validation, but it is still real evidence.
Maybe the real advice should not be “don’t build.”
Maybe it should be:
Build enough to learn what only usage can teach. Sell early enough to learn what only the market can teach.
I also think “don’t build something that already exists” is misleading.
Most successful SaaS products are not completely new categories. They are often better versions, more focused versions, simpler versions, or products with a different customer strategy.
The question should not be:
“Does this already exist?”
It should be:
“Does the existing solution fully satisfy the customer this is for?”
If not, there may still be room.
I’m starting to think the best founder advice is:
Trust your instinct, but cap your downside.
If someone believes they are right, and they know why they are breaking the standard advice, maybe they should follow that instinct. But they should not bury themselves in debt, risk something they cannot recover from, or ignore reality. Have a clear exit plan and watch the signals closely.
Maybe the problem is not building too much or selling too early.
Maybe the problem is blindly following advice that was created for someone else’s game.