Building a multi-platform social media scheduler for creators and agencies
I'm Nikki, founder of Growently.
I've spent the past several months building a social media scheduler designed specifically for the people who operate on these platforms daily — creators and the agencies that manage them. The premise is straightforward: most scheduling tools were architected for a different era and treat short-form video and multi-platform publishing as secondary concerns rather than the core of the product.
Growently.com approaches it differently — scheduling across TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube and more, at full video quality, with pricing that scales sensibly whether you're an individual creator or a team managing dozens of accounts.
We're building in the open, and I'd value input from the founders and operators in this community: what does your current scheduling tool get wrong, and what would meaningfully improve your workflow?
Replies
Nikki, you asked, so here is the unflattering version.
Every scheduler I have used solves the wrong half. Getting a post out on time was never the problem. Having something worth posting on Tuesday was.
Second, they all quietly assume one post, resized. That is exactly why cross-posted content reads as cross-posted. Platforms do not differ in aspect ratio. They differ in what an audience there will tolerate.
The real gap, if you want one: nothing tells me which post was actually worth the effort. Reach is not that. I want to know which post started a conversation with someone who mattered.
What are you measuring for creators beyond scheduled and published?
@rabnoor_s i really appreciate your feedback
You just described the two things that actually keep me up at night, so
let me answer straight.
On the second point especially — you're right that reach is noise. The
direction we're building isn't "how many saw it," it's reading the
comment section itself: what people actually said, which hook or opening
line pulled them in, which audio was doing the heavy lifting, what format
made someone stop. Then instead of a wall of numbers, the analytics tell
you the move — "this hook + this sound is what's landing for you, do more
of that" — plus a live read on what's going viral in your niche right now,
so you're never staring at a blank calendar wondering what to make.
you're dead right that platforms differ in what an audience will tolerate, not
in aspect ratio, and "one post, resized" is exactly why cross-posting
reads as cross-posting. Adapting the actual message per audience, not the
crop, is a real gap.
Genuine question back: when you say a post "started a conversation with
someone who mattered" — how would you want a tool to know who mattered?
Is that something you'd define up front (these accounts, this kind of
person), or something you'd want it to learn from who you actually reply
to?
Learn it. Do not ask for it.
A list I define up front is a list I have to maintain, and it goes stale in the direction that hurts most. The people who will matter to me in six months are mostly not the people I would name today.
But I would not learn it from who I reply to either, because that is still one-way. The signal is the exchange that went both ways. They said something, I answered, they came back. One reply is politeness. A reciprocated thread is a relationship, and it is the only part of this a scheduler can actually observe.
One honest caveat, because it will bite you if nobody says it. The person who mattered often never shows up in your comments at all. They DM'd you, or they mentioned it on a call three weeks later. A tool that treats the comment section as the whole world will confidently score the wrong posts highly.
So I would rank on reciprocated exchanges, and I would say plainly in the UI that it is a proxy. Creators forgive a proxy. They do not forgive a number that pretends to be the truth.