year

Attention over time

7-day rolling share of analyzed posts/comments mentioning this entity · 90 daily points ending 2026-10-14

Final complete day: 2026-10-14. Attention was 1.4% — this entity appeared in 12 of 883 analyzed posts/comments in the seven days ending that day (13 mentions).

Each point is a seven-day rolling window of complete UTC days; a point is comparable only when at least 100 analyzed posts or comments fall inside it. A day with no analyzed records counts as zero; missing coverage is marked and never shown as zero. The series ends at the latest complete analyzed day — it never extends into the current incomplete day. How attention is measured.

Recent mentions

1. 2026-10-14 16:46 UTCComment

   At that point I’d understand the temptation lol. Raise the monster round, take some liquidity, hand the cap table drama to somebody else, and go touch grass for a year.

2. 2026-10-14 01:16 UTCComment

   I worked at a few startups and the one thing I noticed in all the ones that failed is bad management. What’s crazy about this is a few had great managers how ever stockholders (mostly execs) always overstepped on management scopes all the fucking time, 90% of time, they think they know better or there is zero trust yet they are paying these managers good money, the amount of money they peeled through due to this was systemic and shocking, on top on a daily basis. I became good friends with a failed startup stockholders/exec, it took him years to admit and realize it but he eventually saw it. There is always a probation period to “trust the process”, if a stockholder/exec doesn’t realize it, the startup is fucked. It’s a good way when you come in to a startup to assess which way the wind is blowing.

3. 2026-10-13 13:37 UTCComment

   **Startup Name / URL: PartnerMe AI** ( ) **Location of Your Headquarters: London, UK** (team in London and South Africa) **Elevator Pitch:** A squad of five AI agents, driving your growth as a founder, a professional or an influencer, while you stay in charge. They find the right people you need and make a warm introduction both sides approve, draft your posts in your voice, draft your replies to comments and DMs, and help your community lift each other's posts. **More details:** I'm the founder of PartnerMe AI. We are currently onboarding our first paying members. A year ago this was one matchmaking AI agent running as an API extension. Today it is a platform with five AI agents and nine official connectors (LinkedIn, Instagram, Threads, four blog platforms, a community platform and Google Calendar), built by a team of two: me in London and my colleague Steph in South Africa. The Plus subscription plan is £6.99 a month, or £4.99 a month billed annually, with AI usage on pay-as-you-go credits of about £0.01 each, roughly one US cent. Next up: investor matchmaking, a free security AI agent for your business and your people, and a feedback agent that gathers feedback from every channel you have and shows you the patterns. We are looking for: founders, professionals and influencers who want their career, network, startup or business to grow without it becoming a second job. If you try one thing: describe the founder you want to meet to the matchmaking agent, then tell me which recommendation was wrong, and why. **What goals are you trying to reach this month?** The first 100 members on a paid plan who genuinely get value from what we do, and 50 honest “that recommendation was wrong, because...” replies to tune the matchmaking agent. **Discount for** r/startups **subscribers?** Yes: REDDIT takes 30% off the first year of the Plus or Team subscription plan on annual billing (Plus comes to £41.92 for the year, about £3.49 a month). Type it on the checkout page.

4. 2026-10-13 07:38 UTCComment

   >I’ve used Claude Code to build our entire product so far, and whilst it works, I’m sure there are gaps. What I'm hearing (based on a lot of experience) when someone says something like you just did is basically "I did the hard work, now you just need to fine-tune it a bit". And my experience tells me that as a rule that means that they're not only clueless about how bad their own work was, but also about the amount of required work needed to make something at a professional, commercial, and long-term level. You might be the rare exception, but I doubt any experienced techie would want to get burned once again by an inexperienced founder holding a whole bouquet of red flags. You need to be aware of that being how you'll be perceived by these potential CTOs. >We are looking to hire our first technical talent, beginning with 3-month contract intern who can hopefully turn FT once we raise seed. Intern?? You're talking about a very senior role that in your case wouldn't just have to be competent in both tech and business, as the CTO is a bridge between the two and has to be competent at both sides, but also a systems architect and full-stack developer and singlehandedly responsible for product. Not to mention also be experienced at restructuring and rewriting a vibe-coded product that's already gone live, while features are being added. Do you really expect that a person like that would accept being an unpaid intern, or in any way get referred to as an intern, while waiting for you to raise seed? I'm neither joking nor exaggerating when I say that I've come across startups trying to recruit a person like that without realizing that their whole seed round is less than what a person like that can make in a year. I'm just trying to help your perspective right here. I would suggest that you go take a look at what a competent and experienced CTO is making in your area, or where you would recruit them from, and first of all figure out if you could afford that even after having raised your seed. Don't be surprised if their salary is in the range of $150k-$250k USD, plus some decent equity, for the first year. If you can handle that you'd need to look at the budget that they'd expect for the rest of the team to be recruited once you get your investment. All of that is basically just the baseline, and anything less is you making a compromise just to get this thing launched even though you can't afford it. It's that startup hustle doing the impossible. Which is perfectly fine, as long as you understand what compromises you're making, and adjust your expectations and management style accordingly. You will not get an experienced CTO as an unpaid "intern" just waiting for you to try to raise seed; but you might get yourself an unemployed very junior techie wanting to call themselves a CTO. And maybe you can work with that, but only if you don't expect them to perform as a $250k person would.

5. 2026-10-13 05:31 UTCComment

   I’m in a similar position and i am not an expert. The AI agent describes your technology, not a problem someone has today. Nobody want agent, they need for example laptop under €800 that won’t die in a year. The distribution is hard, because the pitch is too broad for anyone to recognise themselves in it. Think of things people research for hours and fear getting wrong, or continue to wonder what to buy. Don’t try to cover everything. Pick one problem. Which category do your users/testers ask about most?