Build in Public

You Roasted My Landing Page. I Listened. Here's What Changed.

May 11, 2026 · 7 min read

A week ago I posted Spyglass on r/SideProject and IndieHackers. The feedback was brutal. Every founder who clicked through had the same reaction: "I have no idea what this product does." Not the response you want when you've spent three weeks building.

Here's the actual feedback, what I changed, and what I learned about listening to users when the feedback stings.

The Raw Feedback

"Interesting idea but the landing page is overwhelming. Too many tools at once. I'd focus on one killer feature and make that the hero."

— r/SideProject

"How is this different from just using ChatGPT to research competitors? Genuine question. The 'Why X Won' articles are good content but what does the paid tool do that I can't do with a prompt?"

— IndieHackers

Two problems, clearly stated: (1) the page was visually overwhelming, and (2) the value proposition wasn't differentiated from free alternatives. Both were correct.

Problem 1: The "Wall of Tools"

The old landing page threw nine free tools in a grid right below the hero section. Landscape Scanner, Blind Spot Checker, Competitive Roast, Threat Score, Risk Assessment, CI Maturity, Battle Card Generator, Quick Scan, Free Analysis — all on one page.

In my head, I was showing value. "Look at all this free stuff!" On the user's screen, it was a wall of indecision. Nobody knew which button to click first, so they clicked none of them.

What I changed: Killed the 9-card grid. Now the homepage shows only 3 focused tools below the hero:

• Battle Card Generator — our killer feature. Instant, shareable comparison cards between any two SaaS tools. Use it before a sales call, share it on Twitter, embed it in your pitch deck.
• Landscape Scanner — map an entire competitive landscape from a single SaaS URL.
• Quick Scan — paste two URLs, get a head-to-head positioning analysis in seconds.

Below those three, a single link: "View all 9 free tools." Simple. Focused. One decision at a time.

Problem 2: "Why Not Just Use ChatGPT?"

This one stung because it's a fair question. Why would anyone pay $29 for a competitive intelligence report when they can type "Analyze my competitors" into ChatGPT?

The short answer: because ChatGPT doesn't have a curated database of 125+ SaaS tools with verified pricing data. Because ChatGPT hallucinates features and pricing. Because ChatGPT can't monitor competitors weekly and alert you when they change. Because ChatGPT output varies wildly every session, making comparisons unreliable.

But instead of explaining this in a long blog post nobody would read, I added a "Why Not Just Use ChatGPT?" section directly on the homepage with six specific, scannable bullet points:

1. Real data, not hallucinations: Our 125-tool database has verified pricing, features, and categories.
2. Consistent methodology: Every report follows the same structure. ChatGPT output varies unpredictably.
3. Automated monitoring: Tracker tier checks competitors weekly. ChatGPT has no memory.
4. Historical timeline: See how competitors evolved. ChatGPT has a training cutoff date.
5. Formatted assets: Battle cards, widgets, and shareable reports. ChatGPT gives you raw text.
6. Purpose-built: No prompt engineering required. No "as an AI language model" disclaimers.

Problem 3: Navigation Was a Maze

This one came from watching session recordings. Visitors who made it past the hero section couldn't find the tools they wanted. The Battle Card Generator — which should be our most discoverable feature — was buried two clicks deep.

What I changed: Added "Battle Cards" and "Free Tools" to the main nav on every page across the entire site. Eight pages updated. No more hunting.

I also added Battle Card Generator footer links to all 39 "Why X Won" blog posts — the articles that people actually read and share. Each one now cross-promotes the card generator as the logical next step: "Read about why Stripe won? Generate a battle card for your competitor."

What I Learned

1. Users don't read. They scan.

I wrote careful, nuanced positioning copy. Nobody read it. The new page uses large headings, 3 tool cards with icons, and a scannable comparison section. If a first-time visitor can't understand what you do in 5 seconds, they're gone.

2. The objection you're avoiding IS the problem.

I knew the "Why not ChatGPT?" question was coming. I had a good answer to it. But I hid the answer in blog posts instead of putting it on the homepage. If someone asks the question, answer it where they're standing — not three clicks away.

3. Fewer tools = more users.

I built 9 free tools because I could. That was a mistake. More tools didn't mean more value — it meant more decisions, more clicks, more friction. Three focused tools perform better than nine scattered ones.

What's Next

The page is better, but the work isn't done. My next priorities:

• Get a real user to try the Battle Card Generator and tell me what breaks. Everything works in dev; nothing works in production until a stranger touches it.
• Convert a free tool user to a paid Snapshot customer. The funnel is there. The payment links work. I need a real transaction to validate the model.
• Write the next deep-dive analysis. The content flywheel is the distribution strategy. More analyses = more backlinks = more traffic.

Try it yourself: Generate a Battle Card for your company vs your top competitor. It's free, no signup required. If something breaks or if the output is useless, tell me. That's exactly the kind of feedback that makes the product better.

Want to Roast Me Again?

I'm building Spyglass in public. If you have feedback — brutal or otherwise — I want it. Reply on IndieHackers, find me on Reddit r/SideProject, or send a message directly. Every critique makes the product sharper.