Hi everyone,

I m about to launch my product, ViralSort 2.0, and I m exploring whether to launch with a Product Hunt hunter or do it on my own.
I ve launched a few products both with hunters and independently, but I m still not convinced which approach truly drives more visibility, engagement, or traction.
Has anyone tried launching with a hunter?
Did it make a noticeable difference, or would you recommend submitting independently?
I d love to hear your experiences, insights, or even lessons learned from both approaches!

Hey All,

The thesis of a 1-person Unicorn has been going around since the emergence of LLMs and Agents. While I certainly see how an engineer can now do the work of 10, maybe 20 engineers, I'm still not able to see the path to a $1B company.

To the sellers of upvote bots:

You're not "supporting" makers. You're misleading the community.

Product Hunt was built to surface genuinely useful, creative, and innovative products. The moment fake upvotes flood the rankings, it becomes harder for real builders to gain visibility and easier for spam and mediocrity to win.

When I launched my design agency, I gave a 20% "early adopter" discount to almost every client who asked for one. I told myself it was necessary to build a portfolio. In reality, I was afraid of hearing the word "no."

Eventually, I was overbooked, underpaid, and burning out. I decided to enforce a strict no-discount policy across all services. I was expecting angry pushbacks and lost deals. Instead, most clients simply accepted the quote, and those who asked for discounts respected my polite refusal and signed anyway.

The lesson I learned: Clients negotiate discounts not because you are overpriced, but simply because they want to see if you'll yield. Discounting your core rate erodes trust and signals insecurity in your work. If a client truly has a lower budget, reduce the scope of work rather than cutting your price.

How do you handle clients who constantly ask for discounts? Do you hold your ground or offer scope adjustments?

I'm considering the possibility of small development teams spending less time on repetitive tasks and more time on solving actual problems.

For instance, a team could end up spending hours each week on manual testing, carrying out deployment checks, preparing bug reports, or keeping the project updates in order. However, it isn't always the case that everything should be automated since the costs involved in setting it up and in maintaining it can end up exceeding the time that is saved.

I would like to get some feedback from developers and startup teams who have dealt with this issue.

What is the basis on which you choose the first repetitive task to automate and was the outcome worth the trouble?

This is a very classic founder problem which many first time developers make. The classic "I should develope this product with so and so features to make it the best product in the market". It simply doesn't matter. Show your product to your potential customers.

I also had fallen for this mistake when I developed my first saas. I thought of marketing it for a market which did not exist at all. And the worst part, I ran ads for it. It wasn't a big budget but I still consider it as a big blunder on my side. Then I came up with the second idea regarding LinkedIn. Now, the LinkedIn related saas had a completely opposite problem. It had a market, but it was extremely competitive. It was like every one guy on reddit has made exactly that same product. So, I took two attempts to understand the value of marketing, competition analysis and whether the product actually works or I am just building.