GhostView

The problem is real and specific: a new class of non-traditional builders is shipping consumer and prosumer apps generated on Lovable, Bolt, v0, Replit and Cursor, getting some early traffic (50–2,000 users), and trying to find PMF without the analytics muscle of a normal product team. For this cohort, instrumenting Mixpanel/Amplitude is genuinely overkill, and watching Hotjar replays one by one doesn't scale past a few dozen sessions. The pain is real, it's recurring (every new app they ship), and the user has urgency because they're actively iterating. The sharper question is whether this pain is acute enough that the builder will pay, or whether it's a 'nice to have' they solve by skimming 5 recordings and moving on. Many vibe-coders are hobbyists or side-project builders with low willingness to pay — the converters who actually have PMF graduate quickly to PostHog or Amplitude (both with generous free tiers). So the willingness-to-pay window may be narrow: post-traffic, pre-PMF, and ideally pre-graduation-to-real-analytics. That said, the ICP itself is one of the fastest-growing developer segments of the last 18 months, which is a real tailwind even if monetization-per-user is modest.

The product is a one-script-tag session recorder with an LLM layer on top that synthesizes patterns across sessions ('users rage-click the disabled Submit button on step 3,' 'completers skip the onboarding video'). The 90-second install and no-SDK promise is well-matched to the ICP — vibe-coders won't instrument event taxonomies. Dogfooding the site is a nice credibility signal and a smart distribution loop. The differentiation claim — 'synthesis across all sessions, not one clip at a time' — is the entire thesis. It's a credible wedge today because PostHog's and Clarity's AI summaries are still relatively shallow as of my training cutoff, but this is exactly the kind of feature both will ship. PostHog already has 'AI session summaries' in some form, and Microsoft Clarity has Copilot integration. The defensibility argument therefore can't be 'we have AI synthesis' — it has to be 'we have the AI-builder ICP wired in: integrations with Lovable/Bolt/v0 publishing flows, prompts tuned for vibe-coded UI patterns, pricing and onboarding designed for solo builders.' The masked-by-default privacy posture and JSON export are good hygiene but not differentiators. The real product question is what the second feature is — because as a single-screen 'here's why users churn' tool, retention will be a problem once a builder either finds PMF or abandons the app.

Bottom-up: the AI-builder cohort across Lovable, v0, Bolt, Replit Agents and Cursor-shipped apps is plausibly in the low hundreds of thousands of active builders globally as of late 2024, growing fast. If GhostView captures 1% of that cohort at $20/mo average ($240 ARPU), that's roughly $250–500K ARR at modest penetration — interesting for an angel outcome, thin for a VC outcome. A $20–50/mo price point feels right for the ICP; anything higher pushes builders to free PostHog/Clarity. The expansion path that would make this a real business: (1) follow builders into PMF and become the analytics layer for their app, competing with PostHog directly, or (2) sell the synthesis layer to agencies/studios shipping AI-coded apps at volume. Without one of those expansion vectors, this is a $1–3M ARR lifestyle business, which is fine for an angel check but caps the upside.

1) PostHog — open-source product analytics + session replay + LLM summaries. Direct competitor with a free tier; the gravitational threat. GhostView's bet is that PostHog is too heavy/intimidating for vibe-coders. As of my training data, PostHog has raised >$25M and is well-resourced. 2) Microsoft Clarity — free session recording with Copilot-powered insights. The 'free forever' competitor; hard to beat on price, beatable on ICP focus and UX. 3) Hotjar (Contentsquare) — legacy session replay, enterprise-oriented, slow to adapt to AI-builder ICP. Unlikely to win this segment but sets the price ceiling. 4) FullStory / LogRocket — premium session replay with some AI; priced for funded startups, not vibe-coders. GhostView is a tier below in price and feature surface. 5) June.so / Mixpanel Lite tiers — adjacent attempts at 'analytics for early-stage products.' June pivoted; instructive for thinking about how hard the 'analytics-lite for pre-PMF' segment is to monetize. As of my training data, June was acquired/wound down — worth digging into why before committing. The most plausible exit is acqui-hire by Lovable, Bolt, or Vercel, or a tuck-in to PostHog. None of these are 50x outcomes.

1) PostHog/Clarity ship the same feature in 6 months. Both already have session replay + AI summaries; the gap GhostView is exploiting is narrow and closing. Mitigation: lock in distribution via native integrations with Lovable/Bolt/v0 before the incumbents do, and build the second feature (cohort analysis, funnel synthesis) that makes GhostView the obvious choice for this ICP. 2) ICP has low willingness to pay and high churn. Vibe-coders are price-sensitive; the ones who hit PMF graduate to PostHog. Mitigation unclear — needs evidence from current paying users that ARPU and retention are workable. 3) Solo technical founder, no GTM motion described. Distribution to this ICP is via Twitter/X, YouTube tutorials, and integrations with the AI-builder platforms themselves. No evidence yet the founder can run that motion. Mitigation: track whether the founder is shipping content/integrations weekly. 4) 'AI synthesis' quality is hard to maintain across diverse app types. LLM summaries of UI sessions can be generic ('users seem confused on step 2'). If the insights aren't actionable, retention dies. No mitigation visible yet — needs user testimonials showing specific 'I fixed X because of GhostView' stories. 5) No geography, no ask, no traction shared. For an angel, this is a meaningful information gap. A founder who doesn't share user counts at pre-seed usually doesn't have flattering ones.

1) The AI-builder ICP will pay $20–50/mo for synthesis-first session replay before graduating to PostHog. Validation in 60 days: 25 paying customers at >$20/mo with <10% monthly logo churn. 2) GhostView can win distribution inside the AI-builder ecosystem faster than PostHog/Clarity can ship competitive AI synthesis. Validation in 30–60 days: at least one native integration or featured placement with Lovable, Bolt, v0 or Replit, OR a repeatable inbound channel (e.g., a tutorial/template that drives 50+ signups/week). 3) The AI insights are specific enough to drive product changes builders actually make. Validation in 30 days: collect 10 written customer quotes naming a specific change they shipped because of a GhostView insight. If insights are generic, this fails fast.