Pricing strategy & experiments
Price increases, price/churn psychology, tier architecture, pricing pages, price ladders, usage-based vs. per-seat, one-time purchases, race-to-the-bottom critiques.
22%
Best tweets about SaaS
50 Best Tweets About SaaS (2026)
A curated collection of the sharpest, most-shared X posts about SaaS—saved so you do not have to dig through the timeline yourself. Updated every two weeks.
Pricing, churn, positioning, and the metrics SaaS founders actually argue about in public.
- Creators
- 43
- Updated
Original Xholic analysis
What 50 top SaaS posts reveal
Across 50 posts from 43 creators, the stance analysis codes all 50 posts SUPPORTIVE of the topic, while mood is split (58% POSITIVE / 42% NEGATIVE). The highest-reach theme is valuation and exit math (theme median 45.411 vs. an all-post median of 22.59), led by two outlier posts at 81.08x and 34.68x the median. The 'SaaS is dead' AI debate (20% of posts) and pricing psychology (22%) drive volume, while churn talk (6%) and metrics critiques persist at lower reach. Lists out-engage opinions on median score (34.58 vs 20.82), and the corpus skews dated (median age 176.6 days; only 20% published within the last 90 days).
- Dominant tone
- Positive
- Median score
- 22.6
- Leading format
- Opinion
- Recent posts
- 20%
58% of posts
All-time engagement
60% of posts
Published in 90 days
Conversation map
The themes creators return to
AI disruption & 'SaaS is dead' debate
Claims, counterclaims, and analysis of AI (agents, vibe coding, LLM wrappers) killing or transforming traditional SaaS business models, the SaaSpocalypse, and per-seat vs. selling work.
20%
Go-to-market & distribution
Organic vs. paid growth channels (SEO, X, Reddit, ads), positioning/repositioning wins, referral and marketplace channels, ad spend transparency.
14%
Valuation, exits & acquisitions
Public-market multiples, venture math and IRR, acquisition playbooks (dead SaaS flips, agency-to-SaaS exit paths), buybacks, M&A targets.
14%
Moats & defensibility
What survives AI commoditization: proprietary data, compliance, integrations, workflow lock-in, plumbing vs. demo, distribution as the new moat.
10%
SaaS metrics & MRR tracking
MRR/ARR milestones and public scoreboards, weekly metric dashboards, critiques of ARR as a metric, revenue-momentum data analyses.
10%
Churn & retention
Churn drivers, cohort retention, annual vs. monthly plan debates, churn signals to watch, retention levers like grandfathered pricing.
6%
Bootstrapping vs. venture funding
Declining VC term sheets, VC math vs. SaaS math, consulting/agency-first as lower-risk paths to software revenue, capital-efficiency arguments.
4%
Tone and stance
SentimentPositive leads
Author postureSupportive leads
Performance benchmark
- Median likes
- 77
- Median reposts
- 4
- Median replies
- 19
- Median views
- 8.6K
Posts with media make up 32% of this collection. Their median all-time score is 26.0, compared with 21.8 for text-only posts.
Format mix
- Opinion60% · score 20.8
- List40% · score 34.6
Consensus and debate
Where creators agree, and where they do not
Shared view
Cheap pricing attracts the wrong customers
Multiple posts converge on the claim that low prices pull in impulse buyers who churn fast and demand the most support, while deliberate, gradual price increases improve cohort quality. Tibo reports raising Tweet Hunter from $9 to $49 over ~12 months and says churn went down, with grandfathered pricing for existing users as his strongest retention lever (2091095568005116164). Hasan Cagli calls 'affordable SaaS' a bad
Shared view
Moats are plumbing, data, and distribution — not features
Posts across the moats theme agree that AI makes copyable features cheap, so defensibility shifts to integrations, compliance, audit trails, proprietary data, workflow lock-in, and distribution. Arpit Bhayani argues 'the plumbing is the actual product' and the demo-to-production delta is '1,000 commits' (2080659543529558207); Auren Hoffman lists proprietary data, deep customer relationships, iteration speed, and lock
Shared view
AI usage costs are breaking per-seat pricing
A recurring argument is that AI actions carry real marginal cost, undermining the zero-marginal-cost assumption SaaS was built on. signüll argues incumbents are trapped between subsidized model labs and VC-funded AI-native startups, forcing pricing-model changes that compress margins (2086896868743909612). A post citing Kyle Poyar's analysis of 1,800 pricing changes reports the average SaaS company changed pricing 3.
Open debate
Is SaaS dead?
The debate splits sharply. Chamath declares 'the Great SaaS Meltdown has started,' arguing AI undermines the durability of high-growth, low-profit SaaS (2014044948660887981), and Arthur says he rebuilt four paid internal tools with Claude in a few evenings, concluding distribution is the only remaining moat (2113771025317941696). Against this, Arpit Bhayani says 'SaaS is not dead — the kind that is hard to justify
Open debate
Annual vs. monthly plans
Alex Nguyen lists A/B-tested pricing that 'pushed annual plans' as a zero-ads growth lever (1957817208870232146), while Tim argues early-stage annual plans can 'hide a rubbish product for 11 months' and that monthly churn 'tells the truth faster' (2098035164689453310). Saurav's agency-focused post adds a third angle: annual-vs-monthly matters less than switching costs, which he claims are operational for agency
Open debate
Grandfathered pricing: retention lever or lock-in?
Even within one post there is tension: Tibo calls not raising prices for existing users his 'strongest retention lever' but immediately concedes 'that's lock-in though, not fit,' and advises splitting churn by old vs. new price cohorts to tell the difference (2091095568005116164).
Open debate
Is ARR the right traction metric?
Jared Sleeper calls ARR 'an awful way to compare startup traction' and proposes (Gross Profit $) / (1 − Gross Churn %) as a fairer cross-business metric (2081505364860645401), while other posts treat weekly MRR/churn dashboards as standard founder practice (2071837810466984132, 2062604519708795014) and Marc Lou's TrustMRR-based analysis relies on MRR directly (2115048116693131297).
What performs
Patterns behind standout posts
Valuation/exits is the highest-reach theme
The valuation, exits & acquisitions theme has the highest median all-time score (45.411) against an overall median of 22.59, and the churn theme the lowest (9.362). The top two outlier posts — at 81.08x and 34.68x the median — are both in this theme.
Format medians and outliers diverge
LIST posts have a higher median all-time score than OPINION posts (34.58 vs 20.82), yet the single most-engaged post in the corpus is an OPINION long-form at 81.08x the median. High-performing list posts include the $0/paid GTM channel roundup (13.38x median) and the dead-SaaS acquisition playbook.
AI-debate and pricing themes drive volume at middling reach
The two largest themes by share are pricing strategy (22%, 11 posts) and the AI/'SaaS is dead' debate (20%, 10 posts), but their median scores (10.176 and 8.92) sit below the corpus median — engagement concentrates in valuation/exits and GTM (22.755) rather than the highest-volume debates.
Media correlates with engagement
32% of posts carry media, and media posts have a higher median all-time score than text-only posts (26.03 vs 21.83).
Engagement is top-heavy
Median engagement is modest (77 likes, 8,567 views, 19 replies, 4 reposts), while the top post reaches 81.08x the median score — and the top five of 43 creators account for 20% of placements, indicating a long-tail corpus with a few outsized voices.
Statistical standouts
- View standout post 1Score 1831.5 · 81.08× median
- View standout post 2Score 783.4 · 34.68× median
- View standout post 3Score 413.2 · 18.29× median
- View standout post 4Score 302.2 · 13.38× median
- View standout post 5Score 261.2 · 11.56× median
Creator landscape
Who shapes this conversation
The five most represented creators account for 20% of the selected posts.
1. Alex Nguyen
@alexcooldev
2 posts
2. Hardik Gohil
@GohilHardy
2 posts
3. GREG ISENBERG
@gregisenberg
2 posts
4. Jared Sleeper
@JaredSleeper
2 posts
5. Marc Lou
@marclou
2 posts
6. Rory O'Driscoll
@rodriscoll
2 posts
GREG ISENBERG dominates reach
With just 2 posts, gregisenberg has the highest median all-time score (1307.43), holding both of the corpus's top outliers: the agency-to-agent-SaaS exit playbook (81.08x) and the dead-SaaS acquisition playbook (34.68x) — both in the valuation/exits theme.
Tibo owns the pricing/churn conversation
tibo_maker's 2 posts (median 145.66) anchor the pricing theme: the price-ladder churn argument (11.56x median) and the declined-$2.5M-term-sheet bootstrapping story.
Marc Lou pairs data with distribution
marclou (median 68.82) contributes both a metrics post — a reported analysis of 758 startups over $1,000 MRR showing slightly declining aggregate revenue, B2B median growth of 0% vs. −6.2% for B2C, and momentum persistence (54% of growers kept growing) — and a positioning post claiming a 663% conversion-rate lift from repositioning DataFast.
Since the previous snapshot
What changed since Oct 15, 2026
- 80% of the selected posts remained.
- The creator count changed by 0.
- The leading sentiment remained stable.
How this analysis was made
Themes, sentiment, stance, and post format are classified per tweet. All counts, shares, medians, creator concentration, freshness, and performance comparisons are then calculated directly from the published snapshot.
Xholic's all-time score compares engagement while accounting for reach, post age, and creator consistency. It is used for relative comparisons within this collection.
This report analyzes the exact 50-post snapshot shown below. AI identifies editorial categories and drafts explanations; all statistics are calculated from the snapshot, and every narrative claim is checked against cited posts before publication.
Best SaaS tweets
Top SaaS tweets from 43 creators
Ranked 01–50
- 01
@gregisenberg ·
THE CLEAREST PATH TO A $10M+ SOFTWARE EXIT in 2 YEARS (with AI and agents) building an agency right now is one of the most interesting business moves the productized agency had its moment in 2022. it collapsed because scaling humans is a nightmare. inconsistent output, people quitting, margins getting crushed. most of the founders (and creators) who tried it got burned and moved on but the thesis was right. the labor problem is just solved now with AI, claude code, openclaw etc. here's the actual playbook i'd run today: pick one painful deliverable for one specific buyer. like SEO content for e-commerce brands doing $1M+ but not "marketing." or like ad creatives for DTC brands spending $50k/month on meta. one thing. one customer. that's it then you build the AI workflow behind it. you're selling an outcome on a monthly retainer. $3-5k/month. 80%+ margins because your cost is compute and a few hours of QA "BuT tHaT'S nOt a BiG bUsInnesS" okay but you're still swinging for the fences because the agency IS the research and development for your agent SaaS every client is paying you to figure out what to automate. you're learning what breaks, what scales, what customers actually want. by month 4 you know exactly what to productize. you build the software on top of the workflow you've already proven works and already have customers paying for agency funds the agent SaaS. SaaS scales without the agency overhead. the clients become your first software customers now let's talk about what this actually looks like financially year 1: 10 clients at $4k/month. $480k revenue. 2 people. maybe $80k in costs including compute, tools, one part time VA. you're taking home $400k between two people while building the software in the background year 2: you launch the software. your 10 agency clients are the first to convert. they already trust you. they've seen the output. you charge $800/month for the software version. now you have recurring software revenue AND the agency still running year 3: agency is winding down or running on autopilot. software has 200 customers at $800/month. that's $1.9M ARR. 2-3 person team. 85% margins. you are now a very attractive acquisition target the exit math is interesting. SaaS at $1.9M ARR with strong retention trades at 5-8x revenue. that's a $10-15M exit for something two people built in 3 years starting with zero VC CAVEAT: Startups are hard. A lot needs to go right. But from a framework perspective, I think this probably the lowest risk, highest reward option for lots of of folks and most of the businesses cost $0 to start basically this is the most capital efficient path to a software exit that exists right now happy building
- 271Replies
- 214Reposts
- 3.1KLikes
- 452.2KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 02
@gregisenberg ·
I don't know why more people aren't buying dead SaaS companies and turning them into AI agent companies. 1. Use OpenClaw, Hermes, Perplexity Computer etc to build an automation that scans Product Hunt, Acquire, and app stores for dead SaaS products. Filter for ones that launched 2019-2024, had real customers, and went quiet. 2. Reach out to the founder on X. Most of them will respond within a day because they've been wanting to sell for a year and nobody asked. 3. Buy it. $5-30k. Sometimes less. 4. Export the database. Feed it to Claude or GPT. Map every workflow their customers were trying to do. 5. Read the support tickets. This is the goldmine. 200 strangers already told the last founder exactly what they needed and he couldn't deliver it. 6. Build an agent-native version that actually does those workflows instead of giving people a dashboard to do them manually. 7. Upload the old email list to Meta. Build a lookalike audience. Those old customers have moved on. You're not selling to them (realistically). You're using their data to find the next them. 8. Run $20/day ads targeting people who look exactly like the customers who already validated this market for you. 9. Build content around the exact pain points you found in the support tickets. Post on X. Post on YT. You already know what to say. 10. You now have the customer profile, the pain points, the pricing sensitivity, the churn reasons, and a lookalike audience. Your competitor who's starting from scratch has a landing page and a guess. The dead SaaS acquisition playbook is going to be one of the biggest quiet wealth builders of the next 5 years. Most SaaS products are a collection of workflows that can be rewritten as agent skills. Many will die. The top ones will pivot to agent companies. Build agent companies.
- 143Replies
- 104Reposts
- 1.3KLikes
- 122.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 03
@chamath ·
We've talked a lot about this on the Pod, but the Great SaaS Meltdown has started and there's no going back. What exactly is happening? In short, hi growth, low/no profitability SaaS is no longer a winning strategy because the big question mark is the durability of that growth in the short term and, because of AI, the lack of profits in the long term. Every SaaS company has sold the dream (to investors and employees) that they will growth quickly now, and harvest lots of cash later. With AI, this assumption may be completely out the window. Now the threshold question is whether their growth will be overtaken by a much cheaper AI-developed solution? If you are a venture supported SaaS startup and are a legacy Heuristics+APIs+CRUD product, it is likely that a new AI oriented workflow is coming for you. Investors in private markets can see this now and think that money to fund short term growth will not be rewarded. Investors in public markets no longer believe long term profitability is possible. They would rather pivot into something they think is more resilient. This is a change in the risk calculus that has existed for the past 15 years and why the chart below is the chart below. Good luck to all the players!
- 360Replies
- 370Reposts
- 4.1KLikes
- 1.4MViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 04
@DeRonin_ ·
Best methods to promote SaaS apps to $10-100K MRR: $0: - LinkedIn outreach - X content creation - Reddit - Facebook Groups - Discord communities - TikTok - Instagram Reels - YouTube Shorts - YouTube videos - AEO (AI engine optimization) - SEO - Cold outreach - Personal brand - podcasts as guest - referral program - partnerships & co-marketing - ProductHunt + HackerNews - own email newsletter Paid: - UGC content creation - paid partnerships with KOLs - paid ads (X, LinkedIn, Meta, Google, TikTok, YouTube) - retargeting ads (Meta, Google Display, LinkedIn) - podcast sponsorships - sponsored newsletters - affiliate marketing (% per each client) - conferences and events speaking - review platforms with paid promotion
- 32Replies
- 42Reposts
- 511Likes
- 26.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 05
@tibo_maker ·
higher price = lower churn sounds wrong but let me explain we launched Tweet Hunter at $9/month then raised prices, slowly $9 -> $19 -> $29 -> $39 -> $49 over roughly 12 months price went up 400%, and churn went DOWN here's what I have learned about pricing and churn from that: 1. churn is decided at signup, not at cancellation your pricing is a psychological filter on who comes in a bad-fit customer will leave in a month or two max. with low prices they come in fast because $9 says "it's someone's weekend project" and $49 says "it's a serious business built for serious operators" 2. the buyer changes with price, so the behaviour changes often if a $9/month user does not see value, they cancel right away (at this price, users generally come in to try or buy on impulse) but a $49/month user comes in with a goal and they usually try harder to get the value from it and if they have issues, they raise support tickets that make the product better what cheap pricing actually costs you: 3. cheap customers are the most expensive ones low prices don't just bring in users who leave fast, they bring in the most demanding people you'll ever serve more unreasonable feature requests, more support tickets, more refunds, and less revenue to cover any of it. I still do support on all 6 products, so I feel this one directly 4. your pricing decides what kind of users you let in, and that changes what YOU build low prices quietly cap what direction you take your product in how to actually raise prices: 5. raise slowly and ship while you raise $9 to $49 overnight is a completely different move than $9 to $49 across a year of shipping we shipped a lot on Tweet Hunter in those 12 months and I could see the difference in who was signing up 6. do not change the price for old users because for an old user, leaving means losing a rate they can never get back strongest retention lever I know that's lock-in though, not fit. split your churn by old price and new price if you want to know which one you actually got 7. when "too expensive" shows up as the reason for cancellation, that's usually not about price it's the polite version of "I stopped seeing value" if your product adds value to your users at a justified price, they will rarely complain about price and if they do, either your product isn't delivering value or they aren't the right user 8. past a certain price you leave impulse territory and enter budget review the Outrank agency plan is at $1,499. at that price nobody forgets they're paying you it gets looked at every month, on purpose, as an active expense see, all of this is true, but none of it will work if your product doesn't deliver the value you promise a high price on a weak product will just get you a lot of refund requests, nothing else it has played out similarly across all of my SaaS: - Revid: acquired as Typeframes, one-off videos, ~30% churn. rebuilt it as a real subscription at a real price. $00k+/month today - Outrank: $99/month, premium instead of cheap. LTV up 33%, churn down ~20%. $120k mrr last August -> $300k+ today - SuperX: told people last September to lock in $29 before it moved. it's at $49 now so do this today: pull up your cheapest cohort and your most expensive cohort compare retention, engagement, support tickets and even user type you already know what you'll find
- 92Replies
- 34Reposts
- 634Likes
- 54.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 06
@signulll ·
one last thing on saas: if you built your saas business before ai, your entire business was designed around one assumption which was that software has ~zero marginal cost. ai blows that up. every ai action costs money. incumbents now have to create more expensive tiers or introduce usage based pricing. both force customers to make a new purchasing decisions while revenue doesn’t automatically increase just cuz the product became more expensive to operate. so your cost per seat rises, your gross margins compress, & adoption remains uncertain. meanwhile, the model labs are subsidizing ai usage like crazy, so they can undercut you. ai native startups are burning venture capital to acquire users, so they can undercut you too. the incumbent saas company (esp if public) is now trapped between two subsidized competitors while carrying a pricing model, cost structure, customer base, & investor expectations built for the old world. unrelated to saas, uber is also screwed (for entirely other reasons though). i love dogging on uber cuz i hate their entire business which is now predatory for both customers & drivers.
- 110Replies
- 67Reposts
- 964Likes
- 90KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 07
@deedydas ·
Founders should know the sobering reality for enterprise SaaS venture funding today. Here’s the math. Say you’re a $1M ARR company raising a Series A with a classic 33222 growth expectation. That gets you to $72M in 5yrs and say $250M in 8yrs. By then you’re usually growing <<50% and the public markets might give you a 7x or $1.75B, if you can even go public. If you get $10M at $100M post-money for the A, that’s a 17.5x and maybe 10x after dilution. That would be ~33% IRR and $10M invested becomes $100M. In the venture model, you have to outperform the SP500 which is 15% and a Google which is 25%. Here, with perfect execution, a lot of work, time and risk, you get 33% in a near optimal (95 percentile) case. And usually, you expect 7/10 things to not work out: execution risk, market size, competition. Plus, this math is for a Series A. You need investors to underwrite even more growth at the B / C / D. It’s really hard to see this sort of deal driving fund returns. Now, of course, there’s tons of caveats. You could pay less than $100M post, try to grow faster, do pro rata to avoid dilution, stay private longer etc, but the point remains. There might be exceptional growth stories like Databricks, Snowflake and Applied Intuition, but most deals look like what I described. In a previous time, SaaS multiples were higher in public (20x), entry valuations were lower ($30M) and the money you needed to hire talent was lower ($150k). You could get 100% IRR before. Now, it’s harder than ever to justify investing here, unless they are true outliers.
- 68Replies
- 39Reposts
- 826Likes
- 273.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 08
@alexcooldev ·
After doing some research, I realized something simple: SaaS that helps people or businesses make money is much easier to sell. If your product helps them earn $1,000/month, paying $49/month feels like a no-brainer. ROI sells.
- 156Replies
- 22Reposts
- 628Likes
- 27.7KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 09
@marclou ·
Is SaaS dead? I analyzed 758 startups with over $1,000 MRR on https://t.co/MZc8tGa5LQ. 1. Their revenue over the last 4 months is slightly declining. That compounded decline would be about 11% per year. At a steady pace, that's 45% degrowth in 5 years. 2. B2B revenue is holding up better than B2C. Median revenue growth was 0% for B2B (255 businesses), versus −6.2% for B2C (257). 3. Existing momentum tends to persist. Among businesses whose revenue grew at least 5% from June to July, 54% subsequently grew MRR. Among those whose revenue previously fell by at least 5%, only 35% grew MRR. n=758 startups and $41.63M in revenue in the last 4 months.
- 238Replies
- 15Reposts
- 499Likes
- 70.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 10
@arpit_bhayani ·
SaaS is not dead. The kind that is hard to justify buying is. Let me explain... companies pay for SaaS when it wins on at least two of four axes - time, money, capability (team's), and tokens. If a tool only saves you an afternoon of coding, that is not enough anymore. Anyone can build the core feature in a day. AI made that part cheap. Dirt cheap. What AI did not make cheap is the plumbing around the core feature - pipelines, integrations, compliance, uptime, audit trails, and edge cases collected over years of production use. That plumbing is the actual product. It takes time, energy, and effort to ensure correctness. The dashboard is just the part users see. The SaaS companies that die are the ones whose entire value is a thin wrapper around a feature a team can clone in a weekend. The ones that survive are the ones where switching costs, integrations, and compliance are the moat, not the UI. Building the demo was never the hard part. We did it overnight in hackathons, and now we do it in minutes with AI. Remember, the delta between a demo and production is 1,000 commits.
- 27Replies
- 24Reposts
- 425Likes
- 22.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post.
- 11
@namyakhann ·
Founders: 2026 SaaS Pricing Page Checklist: Tier Structure: - 3 plans maximum (Free/Starter, Growth, Enterprise) - Middle tier highlighted - Annual discount visible (20%+ saves) - Feature comparison table - No hidden fees Copy That Converts: - Plan names describe the buyer, not the size - Features listed as outcomes - "Most Popular" badge on recommended tier - Clear limits (users, usage, support) Transparency Wins: - Show all prices upfront - No "Contact Sales" until Enterprise - Monthly AND annual toggle - Trial terms crystal clear CTA Strategy: - Different CTA per tier - "Start Free Trial" beats "Get Started" - Enterprise gets "Book Demo" - Credit card optional for free tier FAQ Below Fold: - Can I change plans later? - What happens when I hit limits? - Do you offer refunds? - Is there a setup fee? - Annual vs monthly difference? Remember: Every hidden price = 40% fewer signups. Friction kills deals. Make buying brain-dead simple.
- 16Replies
- 11Reposts
- 154Likes
- 9.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 12
@swyx ·
🆕 How to Kill Your SaaS https://t.co/A0F60h1DcQ A lot of people talk about the death of SaaS but mostly in theoretical terms. We took a real $43,000/year SaaS we use and launched a global hackathon to clone it in a weekend, with both AI and REAL HUMAN evals, using any models any harness. 72 submissions, a lot of manual evals and ~100B tokens later, here are the results In this special @latentspacepod edition we share the data collected, what's still hard about killing nontrivial, midtier SaaS, and reveal the winners of the $10,000 Kill My SaaS contest with qualitative interviews!
- 174Replies
- 13Reposts
- 130Likes
- 19.8KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 13
@alexcooldev ·
How I scaled SaaS MRR → $0 ads: - Smooth onboarding = less churn - In-app upsells = more revenue - SEO + case studies → free inbound - Referrals (still OP) - Daily posting on X, Reddit, TikTok, LinkedIn - Integrations (Zapier, Notion, etc.) - A/B tested pricing → pushed annual plans No ads. No team. Just product + content.
- 20Replies
- 10Reposts
- 180Likes
- 12.2KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 14
@HarryStebbings ·
The SaaS bloodbath has been beyond brutal. Wix for more than any other. This company is doing $2.1BN in ARR and they are valued at $2.1BN. Like WTF. And, they have Base44, one of the leaders in vibe coding, now doing over $170M in ARR. What is going on? How is this being priced at $2.1BN? I sat down with @Avishai_ab and have shared the biggest lessons below. 1. How Public Markets Are Getting Both Wix and SaaS Wrong Public markets routinely misprice tech cycles, hyping vibe-coding startups while discounting core SaaS engines. They ignore the moat of enterprise trust. Giants like Salesforce win because institutions trust them with sensitive data, creating security and compliance barriers automated code projects cannot easily replicate. 2. Was the Buyback a Terrible Decision? Timing the stock market is a fool’s errand. If your balance sheet has cash and your team is focused on core products instead of distracting M&A, a buyback during a dip can be rational. Capital allocation should be judged over three years, not a three-month panic. 3. How Do You Keep Talent When Your Market Cap Is Cratering? Stop treating talent attrition as a failure. It can be a healthy refresh. Bull markets make companies forget that elite teams are forged by solving hard problems, not coasting. When market caps fall, protecting your top tier can uncover hidden stars and make room for a hungry new generation. 4. How Do the Business Models Compare Between Wix and Base44? Scaling newer AI platforms requires ruthless focus on unit economics over expensive, generic LLM usage. The margin breakthrough comes from fine-tuning and combining smaller, custom models to match top-tier performance. Within two years, infrastructure cost declines could make AI COGS a non-issue for platform margins. 5. Why Wix Customers Will Not Churn to Vibe-Coded Solutions Mainstream SMBs have neither the desire nor capacity to build their own tech stacks with automated coding tools. Seemingly simple workflows, like vertical business logic for a hair salon, are surprisingly complex. Even elite engineering teams struggle to rebuild them quickly, proving vertical SaaS remains highly defensible. 6. Why Teams of the Future Will Not Be as Small as People Think The idea that future tech giants will run on skeleton crews managing thousands of AI agents is overhyped. The ecosystem gives too much credit to standalone AI capabilities. On granular business workflows, models still stumble, which means dense, capable human teams remain essential. 7. I Would Be Terrified if I Were in University Today, and My Advice to Students Entering the workforce today is uncertain, but current LLMs will not instantly replace white-collar jobs. Today’s models are strong at reframing data, not deep reasoning, and still make frequent mistakes. True disruption to human capital likely requires two or three more major breakthroughs. (links below)
- 66Replies
- 30Reposts
- 356Likes
- 209.2KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 15
@BoringBiz_ ·
Some of the highest quality SaaS businesses in the public markets are currently trading at a 3-5x revenue multiple If you are shocked that no one wants to buy your $90M revenue business at 10x revenue, you have lost touch with where multiples are landing
- 27Replies
- 11Reposts
- 385Likes
- 56.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 16
@oliverbrocato ·
at 21, i was doing $1M/month in ecom. at 24, my SaaS just hit $410K MRR. if you offered me a $1M/month ecom brand or a $100K MRR SaaS today, i'd take the SaaS every single time. here's why: 1. predictable revenue vs praying for virality when i ran Tabs we were only as good as our latest TikTok. every month started back at zero. people impulse buy sex chocolate once and never come back lol. with Bustem, i can tell you with ~98% confidence what we'll do next month and the month after that. 2. you're actually solving a real problem most ecom is selling commoditized products where your only edge is creative. you don't run a business, you run an ad agency. that's not what i signed up for. at Bustem we help brands find and destroy copycats, counterfeits, and unauthorized resellers. that's a real mission and its fun to compete on more then just creative. 3. your team IS the product in ecom it's you, agencies, and VAs. in SaaS your people are the product. building a world class team has been 10x more rewarding than optimizing another ad. 4. it compounds ecom changes so fast you're building on quicksand. you have to reinvent yourself every other month. SaaS compounds. every customer, every process, every product improvement stacks on the last. and growth hacking B2B is so much easier because most of the competition is dinosaurs running companies from 2004. in ecom you're going toe to toe with the best marketers on the planet. Don’t get me wrong... I love ecom. It’s how I made my first real money. But after building both, I’d choose SaaS every time.
- 35Replies
- 8Reposts
- 164Likes
- 13.9KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 17
@romanbuildsaas ·
Is TrustMRR actually worth it for SaaS founders? I’m on TrustMRR in three different ways with GojiberryAI • Running ads • Ranked in the Top 10 leaderboard • Listed on the marketplace Here’s my honest breakdown 👇 1. Ads The ads bring roughly 50–60 visitors per day to my site. Cost: €1,497 / month So the math is simple: → about $1 per visitor That’s actually cheaper than most paid ads channels. We’ve been running them for 5 months, and they’ve been profitable every single month. On average, TrustMRR generates about $1.5k in new MRR per month for us. So, positive ROI. One small downside: When your ad sits among 20 others, visibility can get diluted. If @marclou ever adds premium placements, bigger banners, or more exclusive ad spots, I’d gladly pay more for that. 2. The leaderboard We’ve been on the leaderboard for about a month. It brings around 50–100 visitors per day to our website. So just being ranked drives real traffic and customers. But there are trade-offs: • Competitors can see your MRR • They can see your growth • Some will inevitably try to copy you I probably won’t stay on the leaderboard forever. Honestly, I mostly did it to settle a debate. For months, people on Reddit were saying GojiberryAI wasn’t making a single dollar. Now the numbers are public and verifiable. End of discussion. 3. The marketplace Even if you’re not planning to sell your company, listing your SaaS gives you another traffic source and a sense of what your company might be worth. Overall: TrustMRR is probably one of the best distribution channels for bootstrap SaaS founders right now. I wouldn’t be surprised if this project becomes a $100M company one day. It’s a goldmine of SaaS data. Huge respect to Marc for building it. Now back to work. 🚀
- 37Replies
- 12Reposts
- 200Likes
- 25KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 18
@auren ·
the four moats that seem to be (kinda) holding in SaaS: (1) proprietary data. (2) deep customer relationships. (3) speed of iteration. (4) business process lock-in. everything else is up for grabs.
- 13Replies
- 11Reposts
- 139Likes
- 8.4KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 19
@tibo_maker ·
they said no to $2.5M in VC money for their 6 month old saas I would've done the same I can't say this enough: VC math and saas math are two different games. a fund needs you to swing for a billion or die trying a good saas business just needs happy customers paying every month most founders confuse the two and sign up for the wrong game this reddit story is a perfect example - tiny team, no full-time hires, and in 6 months they built one of the craziest organic growth stories I've seen 1200+ paying customers, 150k monthly visitors, MRR closing in on $50k. a VC saw it, loved it, offered $2.5m with a fast wire they rightly said no, and their logic was great too the term sheet had a liquidation preference. if things go wrong, investors get paid back first and founders keep the wreckage I get it, but the fund had nothing strategic to offer either no client intros, no distribution, no marketing muscle - just money and monthly check-ins and the biggest thing is their growth doesn't require capital they got here with almost no paid channels. LinkedIn and SEO did all the work you can't wire $2.5m into organic channels and make them compound faster money buys paid acquisition and headcount, and they needed neither see, to be fair, raising makes sense for things like hardware, long R&D cycles, markets where whoever scales first wins capital is the product there but a profitable saas growing 40-60% a month on organic channels is not that. raising there doesn't buy growth, it buys a boss if your customers are already funding you, you don't need a VC to do it
- 54Replies
- 5Reposts
- 134Likes
- 16KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 20
@jahirsheikh8 ·
8 hidden costs of running a SaaS: 1. Payment fees 2. Server costs 3. API usage 4. Email infra 5. Auth systems 6. Analytics tools 7. Support tools 8. Refunds/chargebacks Margins aren’t what you think.
- 29Replies
- 10Reposts
- 66Likes
- 1.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 21
@rodriscoll ·
A few more thoughts on the SaaSpocalypse. The SaaSpocalypse is really the story of a breakup. Wall St is getting ready to fall in love with AI, and to do that, it had to fall out of love with SaaS. Wall St is fickle, but it is serially monogamous. Love is blind; dead love is not. Wall St is suddenly shocked to discover SaaS has stock based comp that should be accounted for in free cash flow, finite TAMs, and companies that mature and grow stale. Meanwhile, Wall St is about to take AI companies public at 50x+ revenues, that dispense $10M stock-based comp packages to employees like lollipops, while having capex bills and negative free cash flow larger than any capex since we built the railways. Why? Because AI is growing like a weed. And growth, like beauty, is, as the poet Keats said, “all you know and all you need to know.” In the face of beauty or three years of 10x growth, all objections fade. We are all in the business of growth.
- 8Replies
- 13Reposts
- 210Likes
- 41.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 22
@coatuemgmt ·
AI labs are out scaling the most iconic SaaS businesses in history. The core driver: A fundamental shift from Selling Software (per-seat) to Selling Work (per-output). The Market Shift: Legacy: Tool-based subscriptions ($0.2T TAM). New Paradigm: Direct monetization of work ($5.5T TAM). By shifting the unit of value from the tool to the output, the addressable market potential expands by 25x. @LucasSwisher1 breaks down the data in our latest C:\Take
Watch video- 10Replies
- 20Reposts
- 174Likes
- 105.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 23
@JaredSleeper ·
"ARR" as used today is an awful way to compare startup traction. It made sense for SaaS- businesses were similar enough. The right metric is something like: (Gross Profit $) / (1- Gross Churn %) Puts low churn/high GM businesses on equal footing with high churn/low GM ones.
- 9Replies
- 2Reposts
- 90Likes
- 14.7KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 24
@GohilHardy ·
Things every SaaS founder should track weekly 👇🏻 • Unique visitors • Visitor → Sign-up conversion • Sign-up → Active user conversion • Weekly Active Users (WAU) • Churn rate • Customer retention • MRR • Top acquisition channels • Customer support requests • Most requested feature These metrics tell you what's coming next. What metric would you add to this list?
- 47Replies
- 1Reposts
- 39Likes
- 1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 25
@marclou ·
My SaaS conversion rate has grown by 663% since the launch a year ago: - 0.22% when DataFast was positioned as a web analytics tool - 1.46% after repositioning to a revenue attribution tool (niche) Words are more powerful than features.
- 68Replies
- 6Reposts
- 276Likes
- 23.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 26
@thenowhereway ·
SaaS used to compete on: Features. UX. Integrations. Now AI can reproduce a lot of that. The interesting SaaS companies will be the ones that own something AI can't easily copy: Data, distribution, workflow, and trust.
- 25Replies
- 4Reposts
- 25Likes
- 764Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 27
@rodriscoll ·
There are growth investors and there are value investors, and there is a chasm in between. The SaaSpocalypse is really about the SaaS story shifting from the former to the latter. From 2004 to 2019, public SaaS companies grew at an average of 30% and were valued at an average of 6x revenues. It was the best, most predictable growth story in the market. Then two years of COVID gave us 40% growth at 20x revenues. Then came revenue deceleration. Not just back to 30%, but all the way down to 15%, while multiples went back just to 6x. On a revenue multiple graph, it all looked fine but it implied the growth rate would revert to 30% That's what the SaaSpocalypse is really about. Everyone is finally realizing that the growth story is all AI. SaaS companies without AI-driven growth will be valued like every other company in the market, on a growth adjusted multiple of free cash flow. Amazing companies with real value but no pixie dust premium. Turns out 30% revenue growth and 10% FCF is worth more than 10% revenue growth and 30% FCF. The Rule of 40 construct is (of course) wrong. The two are not interchangeable, and the transition from one to the other is hard.
- 6Replies
- 7Reposts
- 146Likes
- 17.3KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 28
@kylegawley ·
It's 100x easier to get to $50k/mo with consulting than SaaS x5 clients paying $10k/mo is easier than 1000x customers paying $50 I think people grossly underestimate how hard it is to get 1000 customers - most SaaS will struggle to get 10 It's even harder to keep them, churn is brutal You can't exit which is true, but you already changed your life forever with that kind of money You can invest it and be financially free for the rest of your life in 2-3 years SaaS is brutally hard - years of uncertainty and a 95%+ chance of failure If you have skills and experience consulting is a much easier path with lower risk of failure Or do both, consulting is one of the best ways to find real business problems to solve with a SaaS
- 44Replies
- 4Reposts
- 78Likes
- 5.9KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 29
@coreyhainesco ·
I built a skill for Claude Code that figures out your SaaS pricing — what to charge, how to package it, and how to structure your tiers. It designs your full pricing architecture: which plans to offer, what value metric to charge on (seats, usage, features), where to set the prices, how to make the middle tier the obvious choice with a decoy, whether to offer a free plan or free trial, and how much to discount annual billing. Every recommendation is backed by pricing psychology and SaaS benchmarks. Most founders set prices once and never touch them again. Your pricing is probably the single biggest lever you're not pulling. It's called /pricing-strategy and it's part of Marketing Skills — a free, open source collection of 32 marketing skills for AI agents like Claude Code, Cursor, and Codex.
- 5Replies
- 2Reposts
- 46Likes
- 3.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 30
@arthuryuzbashev ·
SaaS is dead This month I built 4 internal tools I used to pay for Took me a few evenings with Claude If I can do that, so can your customers. And your competitors. Features aren't a moat anymore. Price isn't a moat anymore What's left? Distribution The founder who knows where their users hang out wins. The one who just builds gets copied AI made building easy. It didn't make marketing free
- 25Replies
- 2Reposts
- 52Likes
- 2.7KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 31
@1Umairshaikh ·
7 things that kill early SaaS faster than competition: 1. No clear ICP 2. Over-engineering MVP 3. Pricing too low 4. Zero distribution plan 5. Ignoring churn signals 6. Building instead of selling 7. Waiting for "ready"
- 18Replies
- 2Reposts
- 27Likes
- 826Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 32
@HsanC_ ·
I used to think being an “affordable” SaaS is a great idea. Soooo WRONG. Now I understand it means: - Low quality customers - High support load - CRAZY churn DON’T compete on price 💰
- 19Replies
- 2Reposts
- 46Likes
- 2.4KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 33
@JaredSleeper ·
Comparing the growth curves of AI-native prosumer businesses with those of enterprise SaaS businesses is an egregious category error (and yes, I have done this too). Most of these businesses have gross retention far inferior to even SMB SaaS. And yes, that absolutely matters- both for growth duration and in maturity. Doesn't mean they aren't great businesses! But Grammarly/Canva/Wix are much more relevant comps than Salesforce, Workday, or ServiceNow.
- 3Replies
- 4Reposts
- 76Likes
- 8.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 34
@nrmehta ·
I have lots of empathy for folks leading existing SaaS cos these days. They're fighting battles on 5 fronts: 1. Defending churn from larger platform consolidators 2. Defending churn from cheaper upstarts 3. Maintaining modest growth in the core business (x-sell, etc.) 4. Pivoting to a new agentic strategy 5. Keeping employees engaged while transforming the team and culture for #4 In an ideal world, they'd "burn the boats" and focus on #4 (as @eoghan @intercom impressively did) But some of these companies have significant debt to service while others have anxious public shareholders. Indeed, VC-backed companies have almost nothing to lose, since the equity value of their core businesses are sadly trending toward 0 in the eyes of future potential exits. Definitely not an easy time to run a SaaS co.
- 8Replies
- 3Reposts
- 51Likes
- 8.7KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 35
@buildwtim ·
Hot Take 🔥 Early SaaS annual plans can hide a rubbish product for 11 months, then slap you in the face all at once... Monthly churn is noisy, sure, but it tells the truth faster. If users only stay because procurement already paid, that's not retention. That's a hostage situation with invoices. Bit harsh, but you know when the renewal call feels like begging
- 18Replies
- 0Reposts
- 24Likes
- 774Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 36
@woocassh ·
I like the ladder pricing approach for SaaS Yes I know SaaS is dead, we're cooked, perma underclass awaits but hear me out, if you keep going, keep iterating, I think a few people can still make it, are you gonna try? Anyway, here's my take on price ladders - early users get a forever discount bc they take a chance on an early product - once a stage sells out it might lower churn? - creates some sense of urgency ? still gathering data but will update as I learn keep marketing fam
- 14Replies
- 1Reposts
- 23Likes
- 785Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 37
@petergyang ·
People are saying SaaS is not dead. I think larger enterprise SaaS that can do multiple jobs are probably fine (e.g., Figma). But if you’re building a simple SaaS for a narrow use case, I think it's harder to monetize now because: 1. AI skills can often solve the same problem in a much more flexible, personalized way. 2. AI-native agents like Codex / Claude Code that have a user's personal context and memory have far more knowledge to solve the user's problem vs. a standalone SaaS website or chatbot. 3. People are willing to pay hundreds or thousands for services (human touch is what's rare these days) but charge $20 / month for a SaaS and people will compare it's value to their Claude / ChatGPT subscription. Curious if others feel the same way? I guess I'm in a bubble and most people have not set up their own AI skills yet.
- 29Replies
- 1Reposts
- 54Likes
- 9.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 38
@staysaasy ·
A subtle but important enterprise shift I see with AI is the death of vanity software procurement. The flex is now "we saved 400k on our SaaS bill" instead of "we have to pay $1m for Salesforce / Workday [because we're so cool and successful]." The bragging rights of overspending on a bunch of SaaS you barely need were a huge part of creating urgency, because let's be real dude nobody *urgently* needs ServiceNow. Expensive software was like a Porsche or Cybertruck to a bored suburban stay at home parent. Gonna be a major SaaS headwind in some categories IMO. Bad time to sell anything where "you'll get to come to our industry leadership summit" is a major differentiator.
- 5Replies
- 1Reposts
- 43Likes
- 2.7KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 39
@SahilPanhotra ·
The SaaS pricing race to the bottom: $49/month → $29/month → $19/month → $9/month → $5/month → "Pay what you want" Founders: "I'm building for the long term!" Also founders: Discounting 80% before launch If your SaaS is worth $29/month, charge $49/month The discounting culture is admitting you don't believe in your own pricing
- 6Replies
- 0Reposts
- 12Likes
- 157Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 40
@GohilHardy ·
Things every SaaS founder should track weekly 👇🏻 - website visitors - sign-up conversion rate - activation rate - churn rate - retention - top traffic sources - customer acquisition cost - monthly recurring revenue - support tickets - most requested feature Most founders track revenue only. The real signals happen before revenue.
- 18Replies
- 0Reposts
- 22Likes
- 3.6KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 41
@SimonHoiberg ·
My SaaS portfolio will become fully self-hostable. And like also fully open-source too. It's something we're working on. And I've been thinking about what I would actually charge for if I open-sourced my SaaS products. I don't think I would feature gate them. So my options are basically narrowed down to: - Hosting I'm all for self-hosting, and I'd absolutely encourage users to self-host my products. But some people will still want the convenience of a one-click setup with managed backups, monitoring and updates. Offering hosting to those users is probably the easiest revenue model. Ghost has built a great business around exactly this. - Enterprise Maybe we get bigger customers. They'll need SSO, permissions, audit logs and compliance. That's basically the n8n enterprise model. - Support If a company depends on the software, having an SLA and somebody to call when stuff breaks is worth real money. Red Hat has done this for decades. - Integrations WordPress is the obvious example here. Selling integrations/plugins. Right now, all my products are heavily gated. Closed-sourced, paywall gated, and little accessible. But honestly, I'd happily give away the code if it meant more people adopted the product. Software is getting cheaper to build and easier to copy anyway. Quick overview 👇
- 13Replies
- 3Reposts
- 19Likes
- 4.4KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 42
@ThePeterMick ·
how to make more SaaS money? add one time purchases in addition to subscriptions some people hate subscriptions but are willing to get LESS and pay MORE if it's one time purchase don't leave money on the table 🧙
- 14Replies
- 0Reposts
- 34Likes
- 2.1KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 43
@TheCoolestCool ·
SaaS companies today don't just compete with the brands that they see in their category on G2, Capterra or TrustRadius... They're also competing with: Excel Claude ChatGPT Replit Lovable Gemini Google Indie Hackers In-House Vibe Coding
- 11Replies
- 0Reposts
- 17Likes
- 2.4KViews
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 44
@JosephAbehsera ·
SaaS founders love to share their MRR, but never talk about customer acquisition. So here's a thread showing how many Meta ads the hottest startups are running. Lovable - 230
- 5Replies
- 0Reposts
- 9Likes
- 490Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 45
@saguppa ·
Agency MRR is 30% of my SaaS’s revenue from 5% of customers. Here's the math on why I'm making it 60%. I think one agency client is worth 50 solo users. And i’m not talking eventually. From the moment they sign. Because the math is completely different. I run a LinkedIn automation SaaS. 150+ agency clients. Had 36% agency inbound for two years before we started actually building for them. Here are 6 reasons B2B SaaS founders should be building for agencies: 1. The unit economics are not comparable One of our agency clients runs 45 LinkedIn accounts through my SaaS. A solo user runs one. That's 45x the revenue. There is no efficiency gain anywhere else in a B2B SaaS business that comes close to that. 2. Their churn is structurally protected Solo users cancel at 60-90 days when campaigns don't convert. Agencies cannot leave without migrating every client account, rebuilding their service delivery, and explaining to each client why their portal looks different next week. The switching cost isn't psychological. It's operational. So they stay. 3. Expansion happens without you When an agency wins a new client, they add a seat. You find out on the invoice. MRR grows and you ran 0 campaigns to make it happen. This doesn't exist with solo users. Solo users only expand when you sell them something new. 4. They are the MOST price-insensitive segment. Agencies resell at 2-3x your price. If you charge $79/seat, they bill their client $199. They're not evaluating your tool purely on price (well, maybe the short-sighted ones are) Many are evaluating the margin between your price and theirs. A pricing conversation that stalls a solo founder for a week takes 5 minutes with someone actively making money on top of your product. 5. White-label turns your tool into infrastructure. One UK agency runs $50,000/month in revenue built on my SaaS’s white-label. Their clients log into a portal with the agency's branding. My product appears nowhere. Cancelling means rebranding an entire service line. That conversation doesn't happen. 6. They build your roadmap for you. Agencies run 40-50 client accounts simultaneously. Every edge case, every integration gap, every workflow problem shows up inside one relationship at a scale solo users never reach. The features that actually made my SaaS stickier, the branded portal, the workspace switching, the billing infrastructure that lets agencies charge their own clients $199 while paying us $49, we built all of them because agencies asked for them first. The easiest version of this shift doesn't start with a new sales motion. Before you build an agency sales motion, pull your current customer list and count how many are already agencies. For us it was 36%. And that math alone doubled our revenue in the last 12 months.
- 2Replies
- 0Reposts
- 3Likes
- 392Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 46
@nikita_builds ·
More SaaS companies are one AI project away from being replaced than they think. If your entire value proposition is software that a capable developer and a good model can replicate, you don't have a product moat. Maybe you have a head start, but that’s really it. Sure… you have distribution… but how long until people flock somewhere else? What actually holds up: physical infrastructure, operational complexity built over years, compliance and trust layers that take time to earn, proprietary data that can't be reconstructed. Admittedly, all of the above takes time. But that’s exactly the point. I spent most of my early years as a pure software person. The phone farm at Sendblue always felt like a liability: a weird operational burden we had because Apple wouldn't give us a real API. Looking back, it was the most defensible thing we built. Pure SaaS won't disappear. But the premium is shifting elsewhere.
- 3Replies
- 0Reposts
- 5Likes
- 376Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 47
@frog_omo ·
In 2025, the average SaaS company changed its pricing 3.6 times. Kyle Poyar analysed 1,800 pricing changes and called it "the year everyone lost confidence in pricing." That's not a trend. That's an industry that doesn't know what its product is worth anymore. Here's the structural problem nobody's saying directly: Per-seat pricing was always a proxy metric. You weren't paying for seats; you were paying for the work those seats did. AI just made the proxy visible. One agent does what 10 reps did. You need 1 seat. The vendor just lost 90% of that contract at renewal. So credit-based models surged 126% year-over-year. Hybrid pricing jumped from 25% to 40% of companies in a single year. Salesforce built an entirely new license structure for Agentforce. Clay separated data credits from platform actions in March. Every one of those moves is the same admission: we don't know how to price the work yet. For ops leaders, this has a specific implication: the tool budget you approved in January is probably wrong by Q3.
- 1Replies
- 0Reposts
- 5Likes
- 117Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 48
@jradoff ·
Software ARR and pricing are being disrupted: Agentic SaaS will break the old seat-license ARR model. Traditional SaaS margins rely on underuse, but agentic apps incur real token/compute costs as usage grows. — @sanderssays
- 2Replies
- 1Reposts
- 4Likes
- 668Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 49
@TheGeorgePu ·
Cursor's ARR trajectory: January 2025: $100M. June 2025: $500M. November 2025: $1B. February 2026: $2B. Zero to $2B in roughly three years. Faster than Slack. Faster than Zoom. Faster than Snowflake. Fastest-scaling B2B software company on record. Now raising at $50B. I've been saying SaaS is dead. Numbers like these say otherwise. Or do they? Cursor passes nearly 100% of revenue to Anthropic and OpenAI for inference. The customer isn't buying software. They are buying broker access to other models. Is this SaaS? Or is it the death of SaaS dressed in SaaS clothing?
- 1Replies
- 0Reposts
- 6Likes
- 467Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post. - 50
@lukesophinos ·
Most SaaS founders are building for everyone. Smart founders get hyper specific ie. CRM for Pest Companies below $5M in revenue. The riches are in the niches, and the data proves it. Vertical SaaS has 2-3x better retention than horizontal. Stop trying to boil the ocean.
- 0Replies
- 0Reposts
- 2Likes
- 367Views
Rewrite this post in your own voice and angle.See the hook, structure, and reusable template behind this post.
Best SaaS tweets
Write posts like these, in your own voice
Xholic studies what works in your niche, drafts posts in your voice and schedules them for the hours your audience is online.
Start 7-day free trialTry the live demoTake a 2-minute tour of a sample account in the real app. No sign-up or login needed.
No card needed · Nothing to cancel
Browse all tweet collectionsLive demo: no sign-up or login needed · takes about 2 minutes
Keep exploring
From the blog
- X (Twitter) for Business: The Complete 2026 GuideSet up X for business, build an organic and paid strategy, use DMs responsibly, and track the metrics that connect X activity to revenue.
- Twitter/X Bio Examples by Niche (SaaS, Creator, Coach, Agency)Use practical Twitter and X bio examples for SaaS brands, creators, coaches, consultants, and agencies, with formulas, rewrites, and common mistakes.
- Twitter Growth for SaaS Founders: A Practical PlaybookTwitter growth for SaaS founders explained with proven X strategies. Profile optimization, content cadence, replies, threads, metrics, and templates that work.
More topics like this
- Best tweets about LeadershipExplore the best tweets about leadership, covering decisions, communication, trust, accountability, culture, feedback, management, and team performance.
- Best tweets about FundraisingBrowse the best tweets about startup fundraising, including seed rounds, investor outreach, pitch decks, valuation, terms, diligence, and founder lessons.
- Best tweets about Venture CapitalA curated collection of the sharpest, most-shared X posts about venture capital—saved so you do not have to dig through the timeline yourself. Updated every two weeks.
- Best tweets about Burnout and Mental Health for FoundersRead 50 of the best tweets about founder burnout and mental health, with honest lessons on startup stress, resilience, and sustainable work.