[ The smallest thing that proves the idea ]
Founders with an idea and a limited runway. The most valuable thing we do is argue the scope down — most first versions contain three products, and shipping one of them properly is what generates evidence.
Founders with an idea and a limited runway. The most valuable thing we do is argue the scope down — most first versions contain three products, and shipping one of them properly is what generates evidence.
Tell us the riskiest assumption in your ideaWe will push back on features. A narrow product that ships in three months teaches you more than a broad one that ships in nine, if it ships at all.
Activation, retention and the one number that tells you the idea works, built in from the start. Launching blind wastes the runway you just spent.
A first version will be wrong somewhere. We build so it can be rewritten in parts rather than defended as a whole.
Code in your repository, infrastructure in your accounts, no lock-in. If you raise and hire a team, they inherit everything.
One journey, built properly, launched in three to four months with the instrumentation to tell you whether it worked.
Where the question can be answered without a full build — clickable prototypes, concierge versions or a landing test.
The months after launch, when the product is shaped by real usage — fast cycles, feature flags and a metric review each month.
What has to be true for this to work, and what is the cheapest way to find out. Often the answer is not software at all, and we will say so.
One user, one problem, one path through the product. Everything else goes on a list for after there is evidence.
What you need to observe to know it is working, decided before building so the instrumentation is not retrofitted.
Proven stack, boring choices, shipped in slices you can show people. Novel technology on a first version is a risk without a return.
To a defined group rather than the world, so feedback is specific and problems are contained.
Review what happened against the metric agreed at the start, and choose to continue, change or stop with evidence rather than sentiment.
Almost every founder arrives with three products described as one. The single most valuable thing we do is spend the first sessions arguing the scope down, because a narrow product launched in three months produces evidence and a broad one launched in nine produces a bill.
The second thing is instrumentation. A startup MVP without analytics is an expensive opinion — you will not know whether people activated, returned or dropped, and the whole point of building it was to find out.
Cutting features is the most useful thing an experienced team does for a first version. Expect it, and expect us to explain why.
Activation, retention and the one metric that matters. Launching without them wastes the runway you just spent building.
Proven stack, well-understood choices. Novelty is a risk with no return when the goal is to learn quickly.
Founders are building narrower first versions and looking for revenue sooner, which is a healthier way to build than the previous few years encouraged.
Parts of a first version can now be tested with a model and a spreadsheet before anything is built. We would rather tell you that than take the project.
Taking money in India is no longer a reason to delay launch, which means charging from day one is a realistic option and a much better test than sign-ups.
A focused MVP with one core journey, authentication, payments and analytics typically runs ₹5–15 lakh over three to four months. If a quote is much lower the scope is probably smaller than you think, and if it is much higher the scope has probably not been cut hard enough.
Let’s talk about your startups project. No obligation, just a conversation.
Next service
Agriculture & AgriTech