Road to $1M ARR Day 3: saying no to revenue that doesn't fit

Dec 4, 2025

Road to $1M ARR Day 3: saying no to revenue that doesn't fit

two perfect ICPs, one thread: velocity they can't build internally right now

Day 3 of the $1M ARR sprint.

No new signatures today (quite obvious for a Saturday…). But I found our unfair advantage.

After analyzing every deal we’ve closed fast vs. every deal that dragged, the pattern is pretty clear to me.

Every fast deal we won happened when prospects looked at our systems and thought: “wait, you can actually do that?”

So i decided to dig a bit deeper and figured out we have two perfect ICPs. Not “good fits.” Perfect fits.

1) ICP #1: Pre-seed startups testing PMF

These are founders with:

A clear TAM and offer
First paying customers (proof of concept exists)
Zero systems to accelerate GTM testing
Urgent need to validate product-market fit through signal capture

They convert instantly because when you’re pre-PMF with traction, speed is everything. They need to test faster than they can build systems themselves. We become their testing infrastructure, and scale as we confirm their top sub-segments.

2) ICP #2: Post-PMF companies (25–100 employees) with broken systems

These teams have:

Product-market fit locked in
A defined ICP that works
Chaotic execution (no orchestration layer)
Manual processes where automation should exist

Every time I’ve shown these prospects our LinkedIn outreach orchestration, signal monitoring agents, and content creation process flows, i saw in their eyes instant conviction.

They see the gap between where they are and where they should be with us. The opportunity cost is so high that the deals close within 7 days.

An interesting point here is both share a common thread: velocity they can’t build internally right now without having to hire top 1% Growth/GTM profile.
- - - - - - - - -

I also took the time to sharpen my thesis on the service as software model. I’ve been thinking a lot about why this model works in 2025.

The AI hype promised full autonomy. Agents that do everything. Zero human touch.

The reality is interoperability between systems is still broken. AI needs context, nuance, subjective analysis. The “full-stack AI agent” that replaces humans entirely doesn’t exist yet.

So the market is shifting from hype to ROI.

People want outcomes, not experiments. They want their money to work.

And a service-as-software agency (the 2.0 model) maximizes ROI while minimizing risk. You get the systems, the automation, the agents plus the human layer that makes it all actually work.

After my launch 2 VCs reached out to me thinking this was the stepping stone to build a product (GTM ai agent). Sorry no. This is the model. Not a POC for a venture backed path…

I don’t need this to be a billion-dollar company. I want it to be a $10M ARR business in three years. High margin, high profitability, full coverage across GTM social media marketing.

That’s pragmatic. That’s wealth without dilution. That’s freedom to build something I actually care about next.

(If I ever raise funds to go full scale mode, it’ll be for a problem that matters more to society than GTM agents. But that’s a future conversation.)

- - - - - - - - -

So…getting back to the main topic of today’s update. Focusing this tightly means saying no to revenue that doesn’t fit the pattern.

I have inbound from companies that could pay but don’t match these two profiles. The temptation is real, especially mid-sprint, but chasing misaligned clients slows velocity.

And velocity is the only way we hit $1M in 57 days.

Tomorrow I’m defining the first milestones to hold myself accountable to this plan.

The ICP clarity is done. Now it’s about execution against it.

ARR: $547K → Target: $1M | Days remaining: 57

See you tomorrow 👊

PS: this is day 3 and i still haven’t added the banner.
PPS: if you have any ideas of how i could make these updates better, please drop me a message.