Why 70% of startups rebuild their tech stack within 18 months

🏃♀️➡️ Why does building a startup feel like running in place? Because the tools you're using are a treadmill, not a rocket ship. The modern startup stack creates the illusion of progress: 👉 You're "learning" from YC videos, but not implementing. 👉 You're "building" with cheap freelancers, but creating tech debt. 👉 You're "networking" in communities, but not building real traction. This is activity, not achievement. The system sells you pieces, knowing that you'll fail to assemble them into a coherent whole. The market doesn't reward assembly skills. It rewards a seamless, integrated execution machine. ✍ Is your startup built on a foundation of activity or achievement?

Most startups fail because they solve the wrong problem, not because they build the wrong product. At Antler, we back founders at inception, often before they have a product. The challenge isn't evaluating traction. It's deciding whether the problem itself has venture-scale potential. That's why we put together the Ten Gates Framework. The Problem Core (4 deal-breakers): 🎯 Problem Intensity - Who has it? How painful is it? 💰 Economic Buyer - Who pays and from which budget? 📊 Market Size - Credible path to £100m+ ARR? 💳 Willingness to Pay - Do buyers agree on the value? The Scale Levers (6 weighted gates): ❤️ Must-have resonance 🚀 GTM fit & unit economics 🏰 Defensibility design 🔄 Retention & expansion ⏰ Timing & catalysts 💵 Capital intensity & liquidity The key insight: Each gate gets two scores: H-score (Hypothesis): If this were true, would it imply venture scale? E-score (Evidence): What proof do you actually have? ✅ High H + High E = Proceed 🔄 High H + Low E = Iterate (design tests) ⚠️ Low H + High E = Pivot (follow the evidence) ❌ Low H + Low E = Kill No endless debates. Just clear next steps. But what about outliers? Airbnb, Stripe, and OpenAI wouldn't have passed the Ten Gates early on. That's why I also built the Exploratory Gates for contrarian, market-creating ideas that look weird but have massive option value. We're sharing this framework because founders need better tools to test problems before burning cycles building. And investors need a common language for problem quality. Read the full framework, see a worked example, and try the Ten Gates GPT: https://lnkd.in/eDjGu-_p #founders #venturecapital #startups

Most startups fail, not because they build the wrong product, but because they solve the wrong problem. Reading through Antler’s Ten Gates Framework, one insight really stayed with me: “The challenge isn’t evaluating traction. It’s deciding whether the problem itself has venture-scale potential.” That hit deeply. Most of us fall in love with our solutions before we fully understand the pain. But true venture creation starts from empathy, not efficiency. I’m re-examining my next venture through this lens, not from product-market fit, but problem-market truth. This framework doesn’t just help you think like a founder; it trains you to see like an investor. It turns the chaos of ideation into a disciplined system of learning, testing, and alignment. Grateful for resources like this that stretch how we evaluate what’s worth building, and remind us that clarity precedes growth. #VentureBuilding #Antler #FounderMindset #Makrly #InnovationEcosystem #TheAwakeningOfIdeas #ProblemMarketFit #StartupWisdom

Adam — crisp, useful framework. The Ten Gates elegantly forces the right family of questions: is this a problem worth solving at venture scale, and how much of that belief is hypothesis vs. evidence? Calling out a four-gate Problem Core and a six-gate Scale Levers set makes decisions operational instead of theological — exactly what founders and early investors need to avoid “debate drift.” Ulysses Thomas Ware ICCF AI Technology & Engineering Labs ICCF Global Capital Markets

Smart founders aren't asking for permission anymore. They're not waiting for someone to validate their idea. They're building it, shipping it, and letting the revenue do the talking. While most founders are still pitching like it's 2015 — big market, big deck, big raise — two folks in an apt just launched a dating app for their zip code and hit $10k MRR in 3 weeks. That's not luck. That's the new game. AI didn't just make startups easier. It made them cheaper. Faster. Smaller. AI is a force multiplier AND a speed increase. In this super-fast evolving environment, you need to move through the OODA loop faster than your competition — Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. We're not heading toward 20 million funded startups. But we are heading toward 20 million fundable ones. The shift has already happened. Most founders haven't noticed yet. Here's what they're still doing: Trying to prove TAM instead of showing traction. Pitching category-defining vision instead of local dominance. Sending decks instead of setting meetings. Asking for advice instead of controlling the process. Let me be clear: Investors aren't looking for perfection. They're looking for clarity, energy, and momentum. But at this speed, you need a good map and tight steering. You can't afford to drift. If you want to stand out in a crowded market, shrink the market. Don't pitch the $100M outcome. Model the $1M one you can hit in 6 months. This is your traction math: 500 customers × $50/month × 200 conversions = $10k MRR Clean. Fast. Real. That gets meetings. Let others chase scale. You chase speed. You don't need 10,000 users. You need 200 believers. Don't let anyone tell you what can't be done. Build it. Ship it. Show them.

Latest data suggests 9 out of 10 startups fail. And in most cases, the idea wasn’t the problem. It was validation. 42% of failed startups blame “no market need.” Not lack of funding. Not weak execution. Just building something nobody wanted. That’s where this model matters: Desirability → Test with strangers, not friends. A landing page that doesn’t convert is already your answer. Current median conversion rate across industries: ~6.6%. Viability → If your CAC is greater than your LTV on day one, you don’t have a business. You have a countdown clock. Feasibility → Can you actually ship it without burning the team, the budget, or the next 18 months of runway? The mistake is thinking validation is a one-off exercise. It’s not. Markets shift. Assumptions break. The companies that survive are the ones that validate continuously, killing bad ideas early and doubling down only where all three circles overlap. If you’re building, share this with your circle. Someone out there is about to spend a year chasing a circle that doesn’t exist. 👏 Credit for the creative: Abir Haddoud. 

🤩 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗦𝗶𝗱𝗲.𝗶𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗚𝗮𝗺𝗲-𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗙𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 😉 🔍 What UniqueSide.io Brings to the Table 1. MVP in 15 Days — Not “months later,” but a ready-to-launch prototype in just a couple of weeks. 2. Fixed, Transparent Pricing — No hidden costs, no surprise invoices. 3. Scalable Architecture — Built to grow, so your early version doesn’t collapse under load. 4. AI-Powered Solutions — From automations to data tools, their AI work helps founders stay competitive. 5. End-to-end Support — They don’t just “deliver.” They stay around to help your product evolve. 📈 Real Benefits for Founders 1. Validate fast — Get something real in front of users and start learning. 2. Save runway — You don’t waste months chasing perfection. 3. Boost confidence — You’ve got a technical partner who understands startup pressure. 4. Outpace competition — While others fiddle, you’re building, iterating, launching. 💡 Your Turn: Imagine This If you had UniqueSide.io backing your next startup, what would you build first? Would you: 1. Launch your SaaS idea in 15 days? 2. Start with an AI assistant or analytics tool? 3. Build a mobile app first or a web dashboard? Drop your ideas 👇—I’d love to see what creative founders are thinking. #Startups #Entrepreneurship #Founders #Innovation #ArtificialIntelligence #FutureOfWork #BusinessGrowth #StartupEcosystem #Productivity #Tech  

Do startups still need a technical co-founder? I was in discussions with one of my best friends about this recently. He’s a software engineer and has been in the tech space for a heck of a long time. We were talking about how it can be challenging for companies to secure funding if neither founder is technical. But I believe this is starting to change. With the rise of apps like Lovable and Base44, the barrier to entry in the tech space is getting lower and lower. With the advent of vibe coding, people can now quickly come up with an MVP that allows them to pitch to investors and secure early funding. I’ve seen this firsthand with a couple of my friends who’ve been in the tech space. Both came from non-technical backgrounds and they still managed to launch a productivity app that’s now raised millions of dollars in funding. And this isn’t a one-off. A report estimates the global no-code development platforms market will grow from US $28.11 billion in 2024 to about US $35.61 billion in 2025. Times are definitely changing, and I think it’s a good thing. It gives founders with a strong business and customer lens the chance to identify real problems, build customer-first products, and get them into the market without needing a technical background from day one. Lower barriers mean more useful products, and that’s a win for everyone. #StartUps #Opportunity #TechLeadership

You have a brilliant startup idea. But no technical co-founder. No development team. And honestly? You're not sure where to start. This is where most non-technical founders make costly mistakes. Hiring the cheapest developers. Trusting promises without verification. Not knowing what questions to ask. The result? Missed deadlines, broken products, and burned budgets. According to research, poor team selection is one of the top reasons startups fail. But here's the good news: you don't need to be a developer to hire great developers. You just need to know what to look for. This guide will show you: - The real consequences of bad hiring decisions (spoiler: it's not just about money) - Where to find reliable developers when you don't have a network - Key criteria to evaluate teams — even without technical expertise - A practical, step-by-step hiring process - Red flags and mistakes to avoid at all costs With 17 years of experience helping startups, we've distilled everything into this comprehensive guide for founders who need to build a tech team from scratch. Your idea deserves a team that can bring it to life. Let's make sure you find the right one. https://lnkd.in/etMhJ-G6 : #StartupFounders #HiringDevelopers #SoftwareDevelopment #TechTeam #StartupTips #DedicatedTeam #OutsourcingDevelopment #StartupGrowth #TechStartup #ITConsulting

Why Most Web3 Startups Burn Out Before Breakthrough Most Web3 startups die with money in the bank. I’ve seen a project raise $1M and lose all momentum in 90 days. The tech worked. The team was solid. But there was no engine behind it. No content rhythm. No SEO foundation. No system for scaling visibility. They could ship code, but they couldn’t ship understanding. Here’s what kills momentum: Founders confuse activity with systems. Posting randomly isn’t a visibility system. Writing when inspired isn’t a content system. Hoping for organic reach isn’t a growth system. You need three systems before you need traction: 1️⃣ Visibility System Weekly content that compounds in search — not viral posts, but findable content. SEO isn’t optional when your competitor ranks for every term your customer searches. 2️⃣ Trust System Founder-led content that proves you understand the problem better than anyone else. The best thinkers in this space don’t raise their voices; they sharpen their message. 3️⃣ Conversion System Dashboards that turn metrics into narrative. Data without story is just numbers. Story without data is just noise. If one breaks, the brand bleeds. Most founders realize this at month 6. The smart ones build systems at month 0. Which system are you missing? 💡 Save this for your next strategy sprint. Systems outlive sprints.