When users cancel, they almost always check the box saying "too expensive" in the exit survey. But when we actually dug into their usage logs most of them hadn't even logged into the app twice.
Pricing wasn't the barrier; they just didn't have the actual problem our tool was built to solve. People use price as an easy excuse when they don't see the value.
When your churn goes up how do you figure out if people are actually leaving because of money or because they aren't getting the right use out of it?
Some software is naturally transactional people use it on Friday month ends, or during specific project sprints. But then they churn because they didn't get enough daily value.
If your product isn't a daily-active messaging or project board tool trying to force daily usage feels unnatural and forced. Yet, investors and metric dashboards always push for higher engagement frequency.
If your product isn't meant to be opened every single day, how do you engineer sticky loops or meaningful checkpoints so users don't forget you exist between use cases?
I'm signed into 19 Google accounts on this Mac. Most are for different projects, a few are family. Chrome profiles handle it, but every profile is its own window, and at 19 that gets messy fast.
For a while I used Sidekick, which kept each app in its own container, so two accounts of the same service could sit open side by side. Then it shut down.
What are you using for this now? Chrome profiles, a separate browser per account, containers, something else?
It hurts spending three solid weeks shipping a feature that less than 5% of your users actually care about. Users are great at pointing out where they feel friction, but the solutions they suggest in feedback forms almost always pull you in the wrong direction.
They ask for something massive, but when it finally launches, it doesn't fit into their real workflow.
What s your go-to method for filtering out the noise and figuring out what people genuinely need versus what they just think they want?
I have been reflecting on how early stage startups educate new users, specifically when users come across an obstacle before they even learn about the product. The temptation to instruct users by constantly telling them what to do is great ( Click here, Do this, Try that ). It is even harder when you have put in the time and effort to create something and you want the users to discover all that you have developed. However, too much instruction can lead to confusion and deter users from ever having their aha moment . If, on the other hand, users are left on their own, they might get confused or fail to notice the features that could actually help them. I guess finding the balance in what to do is what s difficult. One group of users might need more guidance than others. I also wonder how others are dealing with this issue, especially those creating learning products.
I have over a thousand users. I couldn't describe them to you if you asked.
They're not one kind of person. They come from different industries, different sized companies, different jobs. Some use it daily, some forgot they signed up. There's no pattern I can find.
In my experience, launch page comments tend to be either congratulatory and good luck or ask a question that has been asked before in the description. Both are very nice comments, but neither provide the creator any value.
The comment that singles out a specific component is much more valuable. Noting that the export screen saved you a step that you would typically take in Excel tells the creator how to preserve their creation. Likewise, noting where in the process you were lost is valuable feedback; both can take about twenty seconds to write.
In commenting today, I adhere to one principle - talk about something I tried and pose one question I can't answer using the content on the page. It results in fewer comments, but the answers are more meaningful, and a couple even started a dialogue.
