Hi HN,
I’ve been thinking about pricing discipline in SaaS.
In many categories, tools that started simple have gradually expanded into feature-heavy platforms — and pricing has followed that expansion. That makes sense from a revenue perspective.
But it raises a question:
Do most users actually need the full stack they’re paying for?
So I built EPIC as an experiment.
Core principles:
₹10/month student plan
Watermark-free exports by default
Lightweight editor (minimal UI, faster load)
AI is optional, not embedded everywhere
Built-in sitemap generator for builders shipping projects
This isn’t a “Canva killer.”
It’s a pricing and focus experiment.
Hypothesis:
A large segment of users want a fast, simple design tool without paying for an ecosystem.
If this model collapses economically, I want to understand why.
If it scales, that’s interesting too.
I’m looking for feedback specifically on:
Sustainability of ultra-low pricing
Feature creep vs focus
Performance vs ecosystem trade-offs
Tear it apart.
Over the past 18 months, we’ve seen an explosion of “AI startups.”
But after auditing 47 early-stage AI SaaS products, here’s what stood out:
72% were thin wrappers around GPT or Claude APIs
64% had no proprietary data
81% had no defensible moat
Most had <6 months runway at current burn
The uncomfortable reality:
We’re in an “AI veneer” cycle, not an infrastructure cycle.
The majority of products:
Call an API
Add UI
Add billing
Market as “AI-powered platform”
The margin compression problem is obvious:
OpenAI lowers price → your margins die
A better model launches → your differentiation dies
Big player clones you → distribution wins
This isn’t anti-AI.
It’s anti-illusion.
The real value layer is:
Workflow integration
Network effects
Proprietary data loops
Embedded distribution
For example, while building EPIC(https://no-edit.lovable.app)(we’re experimenting with workflow-level integrations rather than raw prompt wrappers), we realized the model layer is becoming commoditized faster than most founders expect.
The question isn’t: “Can I build with GPT?”
It’s: “Do I own anything if GPT improves tomorrow?”
That’s the real risk founders aren’t pricing in.
We’re watching a gold rush where the shovel sellers (model providers) are compounding, and most miners are building on rented land.
Curious how others are thinking about defensibility in AI SaaS right now.
EPIC is a workflow-focused AI tool aimed at solving [Lazy designs and improper website sitemaps]. The goal isn’t to be another prompt wrapper — it’s to integrate directly into the workflow layer so the value isn’t tied purely to whichever model is cheapest this month.
Hi HN, I’ve been thinking about pricing discipline in SaaS. In many categories, tools that started simple have gradually expanded into feature-heavy platforms — and pricing has followed that expansion. That makes sense from a revenue perspective. But it raises a question: Do most users actually need the full stack they’re paying for? So I built EPIC as an experiment. Core principles: ₹10/month student plan Watermark-free exports by default Lightweight editor (minimal UI, faster load) AI is optional, not embedded everywhere Built-in sitemap generator for builders shipping projects This isn’t a “Canva killer.” It’s a pricing and focus experiment. Hypothesis: A large segment of users want a fast, simple design tool without paying for an ecosystem. If this model collapses economically, I want to understand why. If it scales, that’s interesting too. I’m looking for feedback specifically on: Sustainability of ultra-low pricing Feature creep vs focus Performance vs ecosystem trade-offs Tear it apart.
What is wrong with AI SERVERS AND AI TOOLS???
Over the past 18 months, we’ve seen an explosion of “AI startups.” But after auditing 47 early-stage AI SaaS products, here’s what stood out: 72% were thin wrappers around GPT or Claude APIs 64% had no proprietary data 81% had no defensible moat Most had <6 months runway at current burn The uncomfortable reality: We’re in an “AI veneer” cycle, not an infrastructure cycle. The majority of products: Call an API Add UI Add billing Market as “AI-powered platform” The margin compression problem is obvious: OpenAI lowers price → your margins die A better model launches → your differentiation dies Big player clones you → distribution wins This isn’t anti-AI. It’s anti-illusion. The real value layer is: Workflow integration Network effects Proprietary data loops Embedded distribution For example, while building EPIC(https://no-edit.lovable.app)(we’re experimenting with workflow-level integrations rather than raw prompt wrappers), we realized the model layer is becoming commoditized faster than most founders expect. The question isn’t: “Can I build with GPT?” It’s: “Do I own anything if GPT improves tomorrow?” That’s the real risk founders aren’t pricing in. We’re watching a gold rush where the shovel sellers (model providers) are compounding, and most miners are building on rented land. Curious how others are thinking about defensibility in AI SaaS right now.
EPIC is a workflow-focused AI tool aimed at solving [Lazy designs and improper website sitemaps]. The goal isn’t to be another prompt wrapper — it’s to integrate directly into the workflow layer so the value isn’t tied purely to whichever model is cheapest this month.