窄创业:4.1万用户如何撑起1亿美元AI业务 EO 2026-08-20

银弹与铅弹

Anish Acharya: 我认为,当你交付的产品无法比市面上其他所有产品好上100倍时,分销当然就变得至关重要。而我觉得我们作为创始人有时会对自己撒的一个谎,就是认为某个只是渐进式改进的东西就是100倍的好。你知道,我把这看作是银弹铅弹的区别。一颗银弹是戏剧性的飞跃,而许多铅弹只是许多微小的渐进式改进。10个、50个甚至100个小改进——10颗、50颗或100颗铅弹永远无法等同于一颗银弹。你真正需要的是那个100倍的价值跃迁。而现在,借助我们能够使用的模型,我们正被银弹所淹没,对吧?银弹无处不在。所以,我确实认为在这个时代,凭借我们能够使用的技术,你可以通过押注于拥有更好的产品来获胜。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I think that when the product you can deliver cannot be a 100x better than everything else, of course distribution is what matters. And I think the lie that we have sometimes told ourselves as founders is that something that's incrementally better is a 100x better. You know, I think of this as silver bullets versus lead bullets. You know, one silver bullet is a dramatic improvement. Many lead bullets are many small incremental improvements. 10 or 50 or even 100 small improvements, 10 or 50 or 100 lead bullets never equal a silver bullet. You really need that 100x value leap. Now, with the models that we have access to, we are awash in silver bullets, right? There are silver bullets everywhere. So, I actually do think in this day and age with the technologies we have access to, you can win by betting by having a better product.

自我介绍与投资理念

Anish Acharya: 我是Aneesh,Andreessen Horowitz的普通合伙人。我负责我们的AI应用基金的投资,涵盖消费端和企业端。对于消费端,我们喜欢投资那些古怪但有效的公司。对于企业端,我们喜欢投资那些有效的公司,可能没那么古怪,但也可能很古怪。嗯,没有偏见。我个人是工程师出身的产品人,空闲时间写大量代码。而且,你知道,我觉得我们正生活在奇迹的时代。所以,如果你在创业,我想听听你的想法。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I'm Aneesh. I'm a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz. I invest out of our AI apps fund. That means consumer and enterprise. For consumer, we love to invest in companies that are weird and working. For enterprise, we love to invest in companies that are working, maybe less weird. Could be weird. Uh, no judgement. Um, I personally am an engineer product person. I write a lot of code in my free time and, you know, I feel like we're living in the age of miracles. So, if you're building, I want to hear from you.

有机增长与付费意愿

Anish Acharya: 是的,我思考这个问题已经有一段时间了。你知道,如果你只看AI的总体趋势,看有多少人是在没有被付费的情况下第一次尝试新的AI产品。因为我把客户获取成本看作一种补贴形式。你知道,客户本身没有足够的动力去主动尝试,所以公司必须真正推动他们去尝试新产品。而有机产品采用的神奇之处在于,客户足够兴奋,无需任何进一步激励就会主动尝试。所以,我们真正看到的第一个现象是ChatGPTMidjourney以及其他一些早期AI产品的采用。所有的流量都是有机的,这与我们在消费产品采用方面大约10年所见的情况不同。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: Yeah, I've been thinking about this for some time. You know, if you look at just the broad trend in AI in terms of how many people are first trying new AI products without being paid to. Because I think of customer acquisition cost as a form of subsidy. You know, the customer is not motivated enough to do it on their own. So, the company really has to push them to try the new product. And the magic of organic product adoption is that the customer is excited enough to just try it with no further incentive. So, the first thing that we really saw was the uptake of ChatGPT and Midjourney and a number of other very early AI products. All of the traffic was organic, which was different from what we had seen in consumer product adoption for maybe 10 years.

Anish Acharya: 看看关于支付意愿的早期数据,我们看到了两件有趣的事情。第一,很多人愿意付费,愿意付费的人数比例很高;第二,AI公司迅速突破了我们原本认为的支付能力上限,或者说客户愿意为订阅支付的金额上限。这背后其实有一个有趣的原因。我很想归功于我们的AI公司,说这是远见或实验的结果,但事实是,AI公司的COGS(销售成本)是不容小觑的,对吧?实际上可能非常非常高,尤其是对于像视频生成这样的产品。正因为这些业务有真实的成本,他们必须向客户收取真实的费用。而为了提供几代人中最好的产品体验,他们必须收取很高的费用。许多AI公司发现,即使他们提高价格,客户仍然愿意付费,事实上还希望付更多。所以这真的让我思考:"嘿,这件事的极端版本是什么?"我喜欢把想法推向极致,我只是觉得这是提炼你思维核心的非常有用的方式。在人们愿意支付高价的极端情况下,有两个实际的应用。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: Looking at the early data around willingness to pay, what we saw was two interesting things. One was that a lot of people were willing to pay, so high number of people that were willing to pay, and the second that the AI companies quickly blew through what we thought were the ceilings on ability to pay or the sort of amount that a customer would pay for a subscription. There's actually interesting reason for that. I'd love to give our AI companies credit and say it was foresight or experimentation, but the truth is the COGS for AI companies is non-trivial, right? It can actually be very, very high, especially for products like video generation. And because you had real costs in these businesses, they had to charge customers real money. And to deliver the very best product experiences in generations, they had to charge a lot of money. And what many of these AI companies found is that even as they raised prices, customers were willing to pay and in fact wanted to pay more. So that really got me thinking about, "Hey, what is the extreme version of this?" And I love exploring ideas in their extreme. I just think it's a very useful way to extract the kind of core of your thinking. In the extreme of, you know, people being willing to pay high prices, there's two actual applications.

两个推论

Anish Acharya: 第一个是,你可以用相对很少的客户建立一个具有真实收入规模的软件公司,对吧?4.1万个客户,每月200美元,就是1亿美元的年收入运行率。第二个是,软件应该随着时间的推移吞并消费者支出的几乎每一个部分。而且越来越多的这些钱将被AI和软件产品捕获。所以我认为这实际上是一个非常非常乐观的预测,一个我们已经看到成真的预测,那就是更多的个人将能够建立大规模的AI公司,消费者更多的需求将通过软件得到满足。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: The first is that you can build a software company with real revenue scale with very few customers on a relative basis, right? 41,000 for the $100 million run rate at $200 a month. And the second is that software should subsume almost every part of a consumer spend over time. And increasingly those dollars are going to be captured by AI and by software products. So I think it's actually a very, very optimistic prediction, one that we've seen come true, which is that more individuals will be able to build large-scale AI companies and consumers will have more of their needs met through software.

没有营销问题,只有产品问题

Anish Acharya: 我想说,在我们生活的世界里,没有营销问题,只有产品问题。我认为今天的产品不应该有CAC(客户获取成本)。如果你需要大量的客户获取成本,那意味着你在产品上交付得不够充分。事实是,创始人、公司和产品从未能够像今天这样以如此大的雄心去交付。你可以无限深入

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I would say in the world that we're living in, there are no marketing problems, there are only product problems. I don't think products should have CAC today. And if you need significant customer acquisition costs, that means you haven't sufficiently delivered on the product. The truth is that founders and companies and products were never able to deliver with the kind of ambition that they can deliver today. You can just go insanely deep.

技术触及面的扩展

Anish Acharya: 部分原因是模型能做以前永远做不到的事情。你知道,我们花了40年构建模型,这些模型赋能或延伸了我们大脑的智力部分和我们社会的智力部分,对吧?但那只是人类体验中,或者说我们的文明社会中,技术可以触及的单一层面。现在,有了这些新的主观创造性计算机,我们可以触及人类社会和人类体验中整个非确定性的部分。那就是我们的情感、我们的人际关系、我们对自我表达的渴望、我们做的创造性工作。所以,这整个部分,可以说是人类体验中更大的一部分,现在可以通过技术来触及,而以前根本不是这样。所以,我认为这是重要的一点。第二点是,得益于AI代码等,软件制造的成本和难度急剧下降,少数人构建更多东西变得容易得多。所以,这在以前根本不可能,而现在你有创始人可以以低一个数量级的成本做更多事情。结果是,你可以选择"深入或回家",而不是"做大或回家"。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: And part of that is because the models can do things that they could never do before. You know, we had 40 years of building models that enabled or extended the intellectual parts of our brain and the intellectual parts of our society, right? But that was only a single sort of aspect of the human experience and really of our civilization society that was addressable by technology. Now, with these new subjective creative computers, we can address the entire non-deterministic part of human society and the human experience. That is our emotions, our relationships, our desire for self-expression, the creative work that we do. So, this entire part, arguably a larger part of the human experience, is now addressable through technology, and that simply wasn't the case before. So, I think that's one important point. The second is that thanks to AI code and the like collapsing costs and difficulty of making software, it just way easier for a small number of people to build a lot more. So, this simply was not possible prior, and now you have founders that can do more things at an order of magnitude lower cost. And as a result, you can go deep or go home instead of go and bigger go home.

广告:Attio AI CRM

广告旁白: 如果你的CRM能跟上对你重要的对话会怎样?认识一下Attio,面向现代企业的AI CRM。连接你的电子邮件、通话和产品数据,Attio会立即用完整的上下文构建你的CRM。然后,向Attio提问任何问题。发现风险交易、起草外联、挖掘新潜在客户,花更少的时间在CRM上,更多时间建立关系。无论你是在做产品驱动增长还是企业销售,Attio都会适应你团队的销售和增长方式。如果你正在用AI代理构建,将任何MCP客户端直接插入你的CRM,这样你的代理始终拥有行动所需的上下文。9000家公司使用Attio构建,包括GranolaModalWhisperFlow。在attio.com/eo免费试用Attio。

Original English

[Ad Narrator]: What if your CRM kept up with the conversations that matter for you? Meet Attio, the AI CRM for modern businesses. Connect your email, calls, and product data, and Attio instantly builds your CRM with complete context. Then, ask Attio anything. Spot a deal at risk, draft outreach, uncover new prospects, spend less time in your CRM and more time building relationships. Whether you're running product-led growth or enterprise sales, Attio adapts to how your team sells and grows. And if you're building with AI agents, plug any MCP client straight into your CRM, so your agents always have the context they need to act. 9,000 companies build with Attio, including Granola, Modal, and WhisperFlow. Try Attio free at attio.com/eo.

窄创业的定义

Anish Acharya: 所以,窄创业是指那些构建极其有主见的深度产品、向相对少数的人收取非常高价格的公司。你知道,简单的数学是,向4.1万人每月收取200美元就是一个1亿美元年收入运行率的业务,而且这种模式已经有很多先例了。你知道,我们看到Google Ultra的最高SKU是每月250美元Grok是每月300美元OpenAI的是每月200美元,我相信Anthropic的是每月200美元。消费者正在有机地涌向这些产品,他们为这些产品支付高价,而且我们一次又一次地看到这些产品交付了他们期望的价值。所以,窄创业背后的整个理念就是:小规模构建,深入发展,收取高费用

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: So narrow startups are companies that build incredibly opinionated deep products, charge very high prices for a relatively small number of people. You know, the simple math is that charging 41,000 people $200 a month is a $100 million run rate business, and there's a lot of precedent for this already occurring. You know, we see Google Ultra's top SKU is 250 a month, Grok is 300 a month, OpenAI's is 200 a month, I believe Anthropic's is 200 a month. Consumers are flocking to these products organically. They're paying high prices for them, and over and over again we're seeing them delivered the value that they expected. So the whole idea behind narrow startups is build small, go deep, and charge a lot.

三种护城河

Anish Acharya: 我认为专业化是一种新的护城河。我认为,借助新技术和软件创建成本的崩塌,你有能力为单个客户深入得如此之多,以至于你可以为该客户做到如此高度的专业化,以至于别人很难与你竞争。你知道,别人必须构建3年的路线图才能拥有一个有竞争力的产品。所以,这简直是把差异化推向了极致。我认为这是一种有趣且重要的护城河形式,尤其与窄创业相关。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I think specialization is a new moat. I think that you have the ability to go so much deeper with the new technology and the collapsing cost of software creation for an individual customer that you can just be so much more specialized for that customer that it's hard to compete with. You know, somebody's going to have to build 3 years of road map to have a competitive product. So it's simply differentiation taken to an extreme degree. I think that's an interesting and important form of a moat, which is particularly relevant to narrow startup.

Anish Acharya: 我认为第二点是,如果你看看ChatGPT,他们试图做很多事情,如果你想想那些确实需要构建一个丰富的软件生态系统才能真正捕获价值的领域,我不知道这在他们的优先级列表上会排在哪里。一个很好的例子是会议记录器。现在有很多产品通过将语音转录为文本来为你做笔记。这很好,但要完全捕获价值,你可能需要构建一整个办公套件。你需要电子表格,你需要文字处理器,你需要日记应用和笔记应用,你需要各种各样的软件。对我来说,实验室是否会真正做到这一点并不明显。所以,我确实认为构建一个丰富的软件生态系统、一个丰富的产品生态系统是另一种竞争方式。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I think the second is if you look at ChatGPT, they're trying to do a lot of things, and if you think about areas in which there's a really rich software ecosystem that has to be built to really capture the value, I don't know where that's going to fall on their priority list. A great example is meeting recorders. There's many products that now take notes for you by transcribing speech to text. That is great, but to fully capture the value, you probably need to build a whole office suite. You need spreadsheets, you need word processors, you need a diary app and a notes app, and you need all kinds of software. It's just not obvious to me that the labs are going to actually get to that. So, I do think that building a rich software ecosystem, a rich product ecosystem is another way to compete.

Anish Acharya: 看,我认为第三点是,有很多产品类别,比如AI代码,你从使用多个模型中受益。对吧,能够使用AnthropicOpenAIGoogle的模型更好。如果你在OpenAI,你永远无法构建一个也使用Google模型的产品。所以,多模型是一种与实验室和金融科技竞争的方式。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: Look, I think the third thing is that there are many product categories like AI code where you benefit from using many models. Right, it's better to be able to use Anthropic and OpenAI and Google's models. And if you're at OpenAI, you're never going to be able to build a product that also uses Google's models. So, being multi-model is a way to compete with the labs and fintech.

超额交付与定价

Anish Acharya: 另一个重要的点是,当这些产品对客户超额交付时,它们确实可以做到。如果你让Cursor帮你用模型生成一个功能,有时你会觉得,"哇,这甚至比我希望的或想象的还要好。"所以,第一,这些产品确实可以拥有这些特质,可以超出客户的期望;第二,它们可以为此收费。你知道,有时模型必须非常努力地思考才能交付那个非凡的结果,你猜怎么着?当它做到时,它是昂贵的。而这应该是这样。我认为,当你交付的产品无法比所有其他产品好100倍时,分销当然就很重要。而我觉得我们作为创始人有时会对自己撒的谎,就是认为渐进式改进就是100倍的好。你知道,我把这看作是银弹与铅弹。一颗银弹是戏剧性的改进,许多铅弹是许多微小的渐进式改进,比如10个、50个甚至100个小改进,10颗、50颗或100颗铅弹永远无法等同于一颗银弹。你真正需要的是那个100倍的价值跃迁。而现在,借助我们能够使用的模型,我们正被银弹所淹没,对吧?银弹无处不在。所以,我确实认为在这个时代,凭借我们能够使用的技术,你可以通过押注于拥有更好的产品来获胜。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: The other important point is that when these products over deliver for their customers, and they can. If you ask Cursor to help you generate a feature with a model, sometimes it's like, "Wow, this was even better than what I had hoped for or what I had imagined." So, one, the fact that these products can actually have those attributes and can over deliver on the customer's expectations, but the second is that they can charge for it. You know, sometimes the model has to think really hard to deliver that extraordinary outcome, and guess what? When it does, it's expensive. And that is the way that it should be. I think that when the product you deliver cannot be 100x better than everything else, of course distribution is what matters. And I think the lie that we have sometimes told ourselves as founders is that something that's incrementally better is 100x better. You know, I think of this as silver bullets versus lead bullets. One silver bullet is a dramatic improvement. Many lead bullets are many small incremental improvements like 10 or 50 or even 100 small improvements, 10 or 50 or 100 lead bullets never equal a silver bullet. You really need that 100x value leap. Now, with the models that we have access to, we are awash in silver bullets, right? There are silver bullets everywhere. So, I actually do think in this day and age with the technologies we have access to, you can win by betting by having a better product.

不要预测TAM

Anish Acharya: 预测总可寻址市场(TAM)是傻瓜的差事。这根本就是不可能的。这非常非常困难,而且它是投资者,当然还有创始人失败的常见来源。当我第一次创业时,我有这种"大头脑"式的产品思维,就是,"嘿,我们需要一个大市场。它需要有一个大的TAM。"我甚至不太确定TAM是什么意思,但它似乎很重要,我知道你需要一个大的。大的比小的好。这就是为什么我早期的很多思考都在医疗保健和疾病管理这样的市场,而我对那些市场一无所知,也没有精力去研究那些市场。你知道,我如何构建一个成功的产品?是构建一个我希望存在的东西,一个我个人充满热情的东西,那就是某种社交图谱移动游戏,那是我和我的联合创始人构建的东西。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: Predicting total addressable market is a fool's errand. It's just impossible. It's very, very difficult and it's a common source of failure for investors certainly, but even for founders. When I was a first-time founder, I had this big brain way thinking of, you know, products, which is, "Hey, we need a big market. It has a needs to have a big TAM." I wasn't even quite sure what TAM meant, but it seemed important and I know you needed a big one. A big one is better than a small one. And that's why a lot of my early thinking was in markets like healthcare and, you know, disease management and I just didn't know anything about those markets nor did I have energy for those markets. You know, how I built a successful product was building something that I wanted to see exist and I was personally passionate about, which was sort of social graphs and mobile games and that's what me and my founder built.

Anish Acharya: 看,当iPhone应用商店发布时,全世界只有600万部iPhone。这算不上多大的TAM,但我们在那里构建,因为感觉它增长很快,而且我们对这个市场充满热情,我们押注于此,也许甚至没有考虑TAM,而我们是对的。所以,我根本不太考虑TAM。我确实考虑的是交付给客户的价值,以及他们愿意支付的价格。所以,我认为现在对创始人最有用的提示是:**我们产品每月1000美元的SKU是什么?**对吧?这才是我们需要思考的方向。比如,什么才是极其昂贵的?产品需要做什么才能达到那个价位?它今天能做到吗?人们愿意为此付费吗?我们测试过吗?所以,我认为如果你找到愿意为你的产品支付惊人价格的客户,你可能就走对了路。你知道,反过来,如果你有一个免费产品,还必须付费让客户尝试,那你可能就走错了路。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: Look, when the iPhone App Store was released, there were 6 million iPhones in the world. Like, that's not much of a TAM, but we built there because it felt like it was growing quickly and we had a lot of energy for the market and we bet on, you know, perhaps not even thinking about the TAM and we were right. So, I don't think about TAM very much at all. I do think about value delivered to the customer and the, you know, price they're willing to pay. So, I think the most useful prompt for a founder right now is what is the $1,000 a month SKU of our product. Right? That is the direction we need to be thinking about. Like, what is the extraordinarily expensive? What would the product need to do? Does it do it today? Would people be willing to pay? Have we tested it? So, I think if you find customers that are willing to pay dramatic prices for your product, you're probably on the right track. You know, conversely, if you have a free product that you have to pay customers to try, you're probably on the wrong track.

付费信号与直觉

Anish Acharya: 对于构建者来说,这是比思考TAM这样的概念有用得多的信号。如果人们为此付费,他们通常是在获得价值。当然,这之前是什么,比如留存率客户获取成本。这些东西是可以衡量的,但这就是为什么在你拥有强大直觉的领域构建如此有用,因为你只是感受到那些感觉。你了解它。你和客户交谈。也许你自己就是客户,或者你对他们的痛点有很好的直觉。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: It's a much more useful signal for builders than thinking about concepts like TAM. If people are paying for it, they're getting value typically. Of course, what is like upstream of that, things like retention, things like customer acquisition cost. So these things can be measured, but this is why it's so useful to build in an area in which you have great intuition cuz you just you feel the feelings. You know it. You talk to the customer. You perhaps you're the customer yourself or you've got great intuition around their pain points.

Anish Acharya: 客户对你的路线图的想法比你自己的还多。有很多定性信号。最压倒性的信号是,你根本无法跟上由此产生的所有事情。这就是你如何知道你的产品市场契合度,正如Mark那句名言所说,市场正在把产品从你身上拉出来,而且往往是猛烈地拉出来。这就是它的体验。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: The customer has more ideas for your road map than you have. Like there are a lot of qualitative signals. The most overriding signal is you simply can't keep up with everything that is happening as a result. Like that's how you know your product market fit as Mark famously said, the market is pulling the product out of you often violently. That is the experience of it.

创始人的心理陷阱

Anish Acharya: 我的意思是,我认为作为创始人有很多心理陷阱。我可以告诉你几个我自己作为创始人时陷入过的陷阱和经历。第一个是试图说服自己已经有了产品市场契合度。如果你必须说服自己,那你就是没有。我认为这极其重要。第二个,也许与此相关的是,你在寻找能证明你有市场契合度的指标,你疯狂地寻找校准什么才是好的留存率、什么才是好的CAC。这些往往没有成效。最终,一个业务有其物理规律。如果你在第一年年底失去了**90%**的客户,即使这在同类中是最好的,也很难构建一个有效的东西。所以,我认为从第一性原理而不是框架来思考业务健康,往往更有成效。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I mean, I think there are many psychological traps from being a founder. I can tell you a few of the ones that I fell prey to and experiences as a founder. So one is trying to talk yourself into having product market fit. Like if you have to talk yourself into it, you don't have it. I think that's incredibly important. I think the second is and perhaps a related point, you know, you're looking for metrics that will justify the fact that you have market fit and you go crazy looking to calibrate on what's good retention, what's good CAC. Those are often not productive. Ultimately, a business has physics. And if you're losing 90% of your customers at the end of year one, like even if that's best in class for the category, it's very difficult to build something that's working. So I think thinking about the sort of business health from first principles rather than frameworks is often more productive.

Anish Acharya: 我认为你经常陷入的最后一个陷阱是超级用户陷阱。超级用户就是超级用户,他们从产品中获得那么多价值是很好的,但如果你无法捕获他们获得的价值,你知道,他们在你的增长图表上仍然只算一个点。所以,你真的必须要么为超级用户构建并捕获你创造的价值,这就是窄创业的理念;要么你需要为大众市场构建,而不是告诉自己拥有一些非常满意的超级用户就可以替代广泛的市场契合度。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: I think the final trap that you can often fall into is the power user trap. Power users are power users and that's great that they're getting that much value out of the product, but if you're not able to capture the value that they're getting, you know, they still only count as one dot on your growth chart. So you really do have to either build for power users and capture the value you're creating, which is the narrow startups idea, or you need to build for a mass market and not, you know, tell yourself that having some really happy power users is a substitute for having broad market fit.

最终建议

Anish Acharya: 最重要的建议是,没有营销问题,只有产品问题。在产品上要有惊人的雄心,提高价格,根据客户反馈进行调整,不要太担心商业书籍和框架,只为少数人构建,收取高费用,无限深入,你知道,很有可能你会找到通往成功的路。这不是一个20年、30年、50年的想法,这是一个3年、5年、7年的想法。这就是丰裕议程的意义,它现在正在到来。因为既有充足的资本,也有消费者对这些新产品的巨大兴趣。你知道,如果你曾经想过要创业,现在就创业吧。如果存在更好的时机和更差的时机,那么这是我整个职业生涯中见过的最好的时机,遥遥领先。

Original English

[Anish Acharya]: The most important piece of advice is that there is no marketing problems, there are only product problems. Be insanely ambitious on product, raise prices, adjust based on what you hear from the customer, and don't worry so much about business books, frameworks, just build for a small number of people, charge a lot, go insanely deep, and you know, more likely than not you'll find your way to success. Like this is not a 20, 30, 50-year idea, this is like a 3, 5, 7-year idea. That's what the abundance agenda means, and it's coming now. Because there's both abundant capital and dramatic consumer interest in these new products. You know, if you were ever going to start a company, start it now. Like if there are better and worse times, and this is the best time I've seen in my entire career by a long shot.

📌 文中提及的人物和组织

公司/组织: Andreessen Horowitz, OpenAI, Anthropic, Google

产品/模型: ChatGPT, Midjourney, Cursor, Grok

关键字: narrow-startups product-market-fit pricing-strategy ai-application value-delivery