The submission for 'Weird' (weird.io) lacks credible data and contains hyperbolic, unverifiable claims (e.g., 'most people have used my product', audience 'everyone'). While the project describes a creative technology consultancy established in 2016, the absence of specific client examples, revenue figures, or team details prevents a higher valuation. The response quality is poor, with key fields left empty or filled with vague assertions, resulting in a score reflecting minimal verifiable traction.
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