SaaS Signups but No Feedback? Find Early Users Who Will Reply
By Maks · April 13, 2026
If you spent 30 days building, got a handful of signups, and still have zero revenue or feedback, the problem usually isn’t just the product - it’s that the wrong people are finding it, or the right people aren’t being reached while they’re actively talking about the pain you solve.
That gap shows up in founder language that’s hard to ignore:
- “spent 30 days building" → the build was real effort, not a weekend toy.
- “got 5 signups" → someone cared enough to try.
- “$0 revenue" and “zero feedback" → the loop is broken.
- “nobody knows it exists lol" → distribution, not motivation, is failing.
Those exact words came from a founder lead conversation Achiv surfaced: someone who shipped, got a few signups, and still had “zero feedback" and “$0 revenue". Another founder in today’s leads described the same pain from a different angle: “the side project has better code and no users" while “the shipped app has good-enough code and a launch plan" - which is basically the early-stage paradox in one sentence.
The good news: you don’t need thousands of users to get feedback. You need 10–20 of the right users, reached at the right time, with a frictionless way to reply.
Why “a few signups" can be worse than zero
A small number of signups feels like validation - until you realize none of them will talk.
Here’s what’s usually happening:
1) Your signups are curiosity, not pain
Many early signups come from:
- friends and founder peers
- people who like trying new tools
- “maybe someday" users who are not actively feeling the problem
They sign up because it’s easy, not because the pain is urgent.
Result: silence.
2) Your onboarding is a one-way door
If your onboarding asks users to do work before they get value, they won’t stick around long enough to have opinions.
You interpret that as “they didn’t like it".
Often it’s “I didn’t get to the part where I could tell".
3) Your first-touch timing is wrong
When someone is actively complaining about a problem, they’re primed to answer questions.
When they’re passively browsing, they’re not.
That’s why founders can post a landing page on Product Hunt, get signups, and still hear nothing: the traffic is not in a “tell you about my workflow" mood.
What feedback silence usually means (and what it doesn’t)
Let’s separate signal from noise.
Silence usually means:
- You’re attracting non-ICP users.
- The value is unclear in the first 60 seconds.
- You didn’t give them an obvious “reply path".
- They’re not feeling the pain right now.
Silence does not automatically mean:
- Your product is bad.
- Your market doesn’t exist.
- You need to rebuild everything.
The founder who said “nobody knows it exists lol" is pointing at the real issue: distribution and targeting.
Build a feedback pipeline (not a one-off “user interview sprint")
The common advice is “go do customer interviews". That’s correct - but founders often do it as a one-time push.
A feedback pipeline is different:
- Find people already describing the pain.
- Reach out in-context (public reply or thoughtful DM where appropriate).
- Offer a fast, low-commitment test.
- Ask one good question.
- Capture and tag insights.
- Repeat every week.
If you can’t repeat it, you’ll end up back at “zero feedback" after every feature release.
Where to find early users who will actually reply
Early users reply when:
- the pain is fresh
- you’re specific (not generic “would love feedback")
- you meet them where they already are
That’s why Reddit threads, X posts, and LinkedIn comments are so useful: they contain real language, real workflows, and real frustration.
But manually finding those conversations is its own job.
You scroll. You search. You open 40 tabs. You hit spam, bots, and engagement bait.
That’s the workflow Achiv.com is built to replace.
Achiv.com: find real pain conversations daily (without drowning in noise)
Achiv.com monitors Reddit, X, and LinkedIn, filters out spam and bot noise, and delivers a curated kanban board of qualified conversations to your inbox each morning.
Instead of guessing what to search, you paste your website URL. Achiv.com reads your positioning and builds Ideal Customer Profiles automatically, then finds conversations that match.
Crucially, each lead comes with context founders actually need:
- pain points extracted (what’s bothering them)
- objections detected (what’s stopping them)
- competitor context (what they’re comparing against)
That matters because “find users" isn’t the whole job. “Know what to say" is the conversion point.
The fastest way to get replies: talk to people mid-complaint
If you want feedback, don’t ask the internet for it broadly.
Ask the people who already told the internet they have the problem.
That’s why the line “the side project has better code and no users" is such a good example: it’s a founder admitting the real pain is user acquisition/traction, not engineering quality.
If your product helps with launch planning, onboarding, distribution, or activation - that person is far more likely to respond than someone who casually signed up after a tweet.
A simple script that gets replies (without sounding spammy)
Don’t pitch. Mirror their problem and ask a narrow question.
Example (public reply):
I saw you mention “got 5 signups" but “zero feedback". What did those 5 users do in the first 2 minutes - did they hit a specific step and drop, or did they never activate?
Why it works:
- It uses their words.
- It shows you understand the situation.
- It’s answerable in one sentence.
Once they respond, then you can ask if they’d be open to trying something.
Make feedback easier than churn
Most founders accidentally make feedback a bigger ask than quitting.
Fix that with three moves:
1) Ask one question at the moment of value (or failure)
Instead of an exit survey no one fills out, ask a single in-app question:
- “What were you trying to do today?"
- “What almost stopped you?"
- “What would make this a ‘yes’ this week?"
2) Offer a 10-minute option, not a 45-minute call
People will ignore “Can I interview you?"
But they will often reply to:
- “Can I send you 3 questions here?"
- “If you reply with a screenshot, I’ll record a 2-minute Loom with what I’d change".
3) Reply fast (speed is a feature)
There’s a reason agency operators obsess over responsiveness. One of the most repeated real-world lessons in acquisition is that response time changes conversion.
Treat feedback the same way. If someone responds on Reddit, answer while the tab is still open in their brain.
Achiv.com helps here because you’re not discovering a thread three weeks late. You’re seeing active conversations in a daily digest.
Common objection: “I’d rather do this manually (or build in public)"
This is a fair pushback, especially for early-stage founders.
In today’s lead notes, the founder may “prefer organic/build-in-public tactics over paid lead tools" and may be “skeptical of tools that feel like more marketing overhead".
Two clarifications:
- Achiv.com doesn’t replace build-in-public. It complements it. Building in public broadcasts. Achiv finds the people already broadcasting their pain.
- It’s not more overhead if it replaces scrolling. The goal isn’t “add a tool". It’s “stop spending founder hours as a human keyword alert system".
If you’re early and budget-sensitive, Achiv’s free tier plus pay-as-you-go credits can be a reasonable way to validate whether social conversations are a consistent source of responsive early users - before committing to any bigger motion.
What to do with feedback once it finally arrives
Getting replies is step one. Turning replies into momentum is step two.
Tag feedback into 3 buckets
- Activation blockers: “I didn’t know what to do next".
- Value gaps: “This doesn’t solve the hard part".
- Trust/pricing objections: “Seems useful but I’m not paying yet".
Achiv.com’s leads include “objections detected" and competitor context, which makes it easier to recognize patterns early (for example, when everyone is comparing you to the same alternative).
Look for repeated phrases, not feature requests
Early users will propose solutions that match their imagination.
Your job is to spot repeated pain language.
When multiple people independently describe the same friction, you have a roadmap item worth shipping.
A repeatable weekly system (so you never go back to “zero feedback")
Here’s a lightweight cadence that works even if you’re solo:
Monday: collect 10 conversations
- Use Achiv.com’s morning digest.
- Pull 10 leads into a simple board: “Need", “Contacted", “Responded", “Interviewed".
Tuesday–Wednesday: respond in-context
- 5 thoughtful public replies
- 5 short DMs only where it’s culturally appropriate
Thursday: do 3 micro-interviews
- 10 minutes each
- screen-share optional
Friday: ship one improvement + write one post
- change something users asked about
- share what you learned (build in public), using the same language users used
That last step is key: your content becomes sharper because it’s sourced from real conversations, not imagined personas.
Closing takeaway: feedback isn’t a volume problem - it’s a targeting + timing problem
The founders who wrote “spent 30 days building" and “got 5 signups" aren’t failing because they didn’t work hard.
They’re failing because the feedback loop requires:
- the right people
- reached when the pain is active
- with a low-friction way to reply
If you can consistently show up in Reddit/X/LinkedIn threads where people are already describing the problem you solve - and do it daily, without hours of manual searching - you’ll stop guessing why users are silent.
That’s the practical promise of Achiv.com: wake up to a curated list of people who need what you sell, with the context you need to start real conversations that actually get answers.