Ship the version that answers the question.

Most MVPs we build ship in 6–10 weeks, depending on how many core flows are in scope. We scope tightly upfront so we're building the smallest thing that proves your riskiest assumption, not a feature-complete product. Timelines stretch when third-party integrations or compliance requirements are involved, and we flag that at the scoping stage, not after you've paid for two sprints.

A prototype is for testing whether people understand and want what you're building — it's often clickable but not functional, and we throw a lot of it away. An MVP is real, shipped software that early users actually run on, with the thinnest possible feature set that still delivers value. We usually recommend prototyping first if your riskiest assumption is about the idea, and going straight to MVP if the idea is validated and the risk is execution.

It depends entirely on scope, but most engagements land between a lean single-flow build and a multi-role platform with integrations. We give you a fixed-scope quote after a paid discovery sprint, not a rough range that balloons once we're in the code. You'll know the number before you commit to the build.

We pick boring, proven technology that your future engineering hires will actually want to work in — not whatever's trending. The decision factors are your team's post-MVP hiring plans, expected scale in year one, and how much of the stack has to survive into the full build. We document the reasoning so it's never a mystery to your next CTO.

Rapid means a ruthlessly small scope and a senior team that isn't learning your stack on your dime, not skipped testing or unreadable code. We still write tests for the flows that matter, review every PR, and structure the codebase so it can be extended, not rebuilt. Speed comes from saying no to features, not from lowering the bar on what ships.

Yes — we build with technical due diligence in mind because most of our clients are funded and raising again within a year. That means clean version control history, documented architecture decisions, no hardcoded secrets, and a codebase a diligence engineer can read in an afternoon without red flags. We've had our MVPs pass diligence for Series A rounds without a single follow-up build question.

We lock the MVP scope in writing before build starts, and every new idea that comes up mid-sprint goes into a parked backlog instead of the current sprint. You'll see weekly demos, so if something genuinely needs to change we renegotiate scope explicitly rather than letting it drift in silently. This is the single biggest reason MVP timelines blow out, and it's the one we protect hardest.

No, and that's by design — we architect the MVP so the parts worth keeping can be extended, and the parts that were deliberately shortcut are isolated and clearly marked. When you're ready to scale, we do a technical assessment against your actual usage data and decide together what stays, what gets refactored, and what gets replaced. Most of our MVP clients continue with us into the full build without a rewrite from scratch.

A small senior pod — typically a lead engineer, one or two supporting developers, and a product-minded PM who keeps scope honest — not a rotating cast of juniors learning on your project. You get direct access to the people writing the code, not an account manager relaying messages. The same pod stays with you through launch so context never gets lost in a handoff.

You do, fully — every line of code, design asset, and piece of documentation transfers to you on final payment, with no licensing strings attached. This is written into every contract before work starts, not negotiated after the fact. You get admin access to every repo and service from day one, not just at handoff.

We push back when the scope doesn't match what you're actually trying to learn — that's part of the job, not overstepping. Discovery includes mapping your core hypothesis to the smallest buildable test of it, and we'll tell you honestly if a feature you want won't move the needle for launch. You stay the decision-maker, but you won't be building in a vacuum.

Yes — if you already have wireframes, a design system, or a technical spec, we build from it and flag anything that conflicts with a rapid timeline before we start. If you're starting from a napkin sketch or just a problem statement, we handle the design and spec work as part of discovery. Either way, nothing gets built until you've signed off on what it is.

A freelancer gives you one person's bandwidth and risk if they disappear mid-build; an in-house hire takes months to recruit and costs a full salary before you've validated anything. We give you a full senior pod, on day one, that's shipped MVPs across the US, UK, and Australia and knows what investor-grade code actually looks like. You get speed and rigor without the hiring risk or the single point of failure.

Start with a scoping call — we'll talk through what you're trying to prove, your timeline, and any constraints, then follow up with a fixed-scope proposal within a few days. If it's a fit, we move straight into a short discovery sprint before the build starts, so there are no surprises once the clock is running. No lengthy procurement process, no vague retainers.