I teach entrepreneurship at Duke and Iām publicly growing a company ā Autopest ā from $0 to $100k/year in revenue in order to help entrepreneurs better understanding the process of building startups. Learn more about my journey here.
Between my own travel schedule and the July 4th holiday, I havenāt shared an Autopest update in a couple weeks. In truth, I also havenāt worked on it as much as I could have becauseā¦ wellā¦ vacation.
Despite my sporadic focus, three interesting customer-related things happened these past few weeks that are worth sharing because theyāre good opportunities to teach about the kinds of things you can expect when you launch a startup.
The lessons begin with the two new customers I picked up while traveling. They both asked for new features. In addition, a third person request a feature that I decided not to build (and, as a result, he decided not to become a customer).
Iām sharing these stories because theyāre similar to experiences youāll likely encounter more than youād expect when you launch a company. Specifically, people will often like what your product does, but theyāll want unique tweaks and updates to fit their specific needs.
In the early days of building a startup, youāll be so desperate for customers that youāll be tempted to build whatever they want. But should you?
Letās explore some of the scenariosā¦
Scenario #1: The logical, low-lift feature
I got a random LinkedIn message from a free Autopest user asking if the platform could BCC every message it sends to a pre-specified address (e.g. BCC messages to a CRM for tracking customer communications).
At the time, Autopest couldnāt do that, but I realized it probably needed to since lots of professionals have to record their customer conversations in a CRM.
I specked out the feature and realized it wouldnāt take more than a few hours to build, so thatās exactly what I did. A few days later, Iād added the new feature and shared it with the person who asked, and he promptly became a $15/mo customer.
Thatās clearly an example of a worthwhile feature expansion. Itās low-lift, it makes sense with the overall product vision, and it adds customers. Whatās not to like?
(The only downside in this case is that, a few days later, the buyer told me he was leaving his company and would need to cancel his account. But he assured me he loved Autopest and would pick it up again as soon as he landed at his next job, so I still consider that a win.)
Scenario #2: Major overhaul for a passionate user
Next on the list of new customers wanting something different is user who loves Autopest. I mean **LOVES** it. I have an email from him where he describes Autopest as being like ācrack,ā and he keeps wanting to increase his usage limits.
Luckily, heās also willing to pay. His companyās account is currently paying $100/mo, which means heās tripled my monthly revenue.
Thatās the good news.
The bad news is that Autopest was never built to handle the kind of scale he wants from it, and accommodating him means having to do some serious product adjustments.
Is it worth it? Should a startup let one passionate user drive its product decisions?
In my mind, the answer to this kind of question depends on two things:
How much do the product updates pull you away from your core work? In this particular case, the kinds of things my passionate customer is asking for are the kinds of things I might expect to deal with if/when other big customers start using the product. As a result, I can see how doing the work now to accommodate certain functionality could have longterm value. Thatās a definite plus.
Is the person willing to pay? In this case, the customer has been willing to āput his money where his mouth is,ā and thatās a great sign. Never, never, never, NEVER pre-build a major product feature if the customer asking for it isnāt willing to pay upfront. If they wonāt pay first, itās a huge red flag youāll be wasting your time. (Unfortunately, I learned this lesson the hard way.)
Scenario #3: A fundamentally flawed feature
In addition to developing new features and functionality for two users over the past couple weeks, I also rejected the request of a third user who would have become a paying customer. But the cost of that customer was too high.
In this case, a free user emailed to tell me he really likes Autopest, but he doesnāt need his follow-ups created by AI. Instead, he wants to write his own follow-up email templates and use those. He said heād be willing to pay for an entire year up front if I agreed to build a ātemplatesā follow-up feature, and I was tempted to do so. But there was a big problem: it goes directly against my core reason for building Autopest.
Yes, I could technically build what this potential customer wanted, but my goal has always been to make Autopest as easy as possible. In contrast, asking people to create templates isnāt easy. In fact, itās the exact kind of work I didnāt want to do that ultimately led me to build Autopest in the first place.
Despite being tempted by his money, I turned down the customer. I even pointed him toward a handful of other tools that do what he wants. And, yes, giving up that revenue sucked, but it was necessary.
In previous companies, I chased bad revenue. By that I mean I built features for customers just because they asked for them and they were willing to pay even if those features didnāt make sense with the vision I had for my product and company. The outcome was always bad. I ultimately regretted the choice because I saddled myself with one-off features that werenāt core to the vision and purpose of my product.
Donāt make the same mistake as me. Revenue is great, but you canāt sacrifice your longterm vision for short term payouts. If youāve validated your product and youāre confident youāre building the right thing, never agree to add features and functionality that violate your productās core purpose. Doing so can only lead to one outcome, and itās not the outcome you want.
"the kinds of things my passionate customer is asking for are the kinds of things I might expect to deal with if/when other big customers start using the product. "
Yes!! When I got started in 1992, I pursued solopreneurs. But I soon learned that it paid off to go after larger clients. So I shifted how I did things to appeal more to companies with 5 to 25 employees. These owners were willing to pay more--they EXPECTED to pay more. They had time and energy to focus on the work we were doing together, and they weren't always getting pulled away by emergencies. And they stayed with me longer--some were clients for 10 or 20 years. In some cases their son or daughter worked with me after they passed the baton. My current clients have 25 to 100 employees.
Thanks for the great article and the way you tell the story.
Mike Van Horn
"Grow Your Business without Driving Yourself Crazy"
This is a really interesting post - whilst looking for product market fit, and when to use market 'pull' to help shape the product. The easy win of a quick update to meet a customers un-met need is a bit of a 'no brainer' - but identifying that a request is flawed and goes 'against the grain' of the product is really good point. After all you could be pulled in many directions wasting lots of time, if you listened to every users wishes and whims. Which is what makes the path of no action a smart call in scenario 3.