The submission describes a small IT consultancy rather than a scalable technology product. The claims provided, specifically that 'most people have used my product' and that the audience is 'everyone', are hyperbolic and inaccurate for a 6-person consultancy. The response quality is low, with ambiguous financial metrics ('marketcap' likely confused with revenue or valuation) and a lack of specific evidence regarding methodology or case studies. While the service itself (IT consulting) has inherent utility, the submission fails to demonstrate the credibility or traction required for a higher score.
Ready to Compete for $150k+ in Prizes?
Move this data into a HackerNoon blog draft to become eligible for your share of $150k+ in cash and software prizes
Score Breakdown
Project Details
Algorithm Insights
Recommendations to Increase Usefulness Score
Document User Growth
Provide specific metrics on user acquisition and retention rates
Showcase Revenue Model
Detail sustainable monetization strategy and current revenue streams
Expand Evidence Base
Include testimonials, case studies, and third-party validation
Technical Roadmap
Share development milestones and feature completion timeline