Ferenc Fekete

Helping non-tech Founders transform Ideas into SaaS products @ VeryCreatives | Product Agency, SaaS & MVP Development | Startups

Most non-technical founders struggle turning their SaaS idea into a scalable product.

They waste months (or even years):
→ Trying to hire the right developers
→ Burning cash on poor planning and execution
→ Second-guessing every technical decision along the way

Meanwhile, competitors move faster, investors demand traction, and the pressure to deliver keeps building more and more.

I've seen it happen far too many times.
Which is exactly why we started VeryCreatives.

We help early-stage founders go from idea to market-ready MVP in just 90 days...
...all without the stress of managing a development team of your own or writing a single line of code.

For the past 12 years, we’ve been building products for venture-backed startups, fast-growing scale-ups, and even globally recognized brands like Red Bull, Nestlé, and Philips.

Here’s how it works:

👉 1. Clarify your product strategy: 
First, we validate your idea, define your MVP scope, and ensure you’re building something the market actually wants.

👉 2. Create a world-class user experience:
Next, our design team crafts stunning, intuitive interfaces that set your product apart from the competition.

👉 3. Develop a high-quality, scalable MVP:
Finally, we build a robust and investor-ready product that quickly gets you to market (without cutting corners).

The startups we work with have:
✔️ Launched investor-ready MVPs in under 90 days
✔️ Secured funding from top-tier investors and VCs
✔️ Scaled from first users to thousands of paying customers

So if you’re a non-technical founder looking to turn your idea into a fully built MVP in the next 90 days... all without the stress or headache?

Shoot me a DM or book a quick consultation with me here to chat more about how you can get there: https://verycreatives.com/book-a-call

Co-Founder

At VeryCreatives, we are a team of expert developers who create powerful SaaS apps that solve problems and drive growth for founders with initial funding. We believe in empowering our clients with innovative software that helps them achieve their goals and stand out in their industry.

Our audience consists of driven and ambitious founders who have just received initial funding for their startup. They are looking for a software development partner who understands their vision, can help bring their ideas to life, and deliver results that will help them achieve their business goals.

Founders with initial funding have a pressing need to build their product quickly and efficiently to maximize their chances of success. At VeryCreatives, we understand this need and are dedicated to creating high-quality SaaS apps that not only meet their requirements but also exceed their expectations. We are committed to delivering value and results that help our clients succeed.

VeryCreatives stands out in the market for our ability to deliver high-quality, innovative solutions that meet the needs of our clients. Our unique approach to software development, coupled with our expertise and commitment to excellence, is what drives us to provide outstanding results to our clients.

Industries our clients operate in, using the SaaS products we've built: 
- Digital marketing, Event marketing & Influencer marketing SaaS
- Foodtech & Delivery 
- Fintech, Banking & Investments
- 2-sided marketplace platforms
- Agriculture & Livestock management
- Packaging compliance & Waste

Markets we cover: UAE, EU, UK, US.

Last week was tough for us.

One of our team members decided to move on after 9 years.

He joined when his kids were still young. Now they’re almost adults.

Over nearly a decade, he became a core part of the company. A leader. A pillar.

But when he told us he was ready for something new, we completely understood.

Because that's the kind of culture we’ve built here at VeryCreatives.

We talk a lot about creating a workplace where people WANT to stay.

But we also want it to be a place they can leave — on good terms, with support, and without regrets.

Sure, it's true that people move from job to job more often now.

But in our case, many team members have been with us for 5, 8, even 10+ years.

That doesn’t happen by accident.

We’ve always tried to build something stable in an unstable world. No politics. No corporate ladder drama. Just good people solving interesting problems together.

And when life happens, whether it's marriages, kids, or relocations, we adapt.

This year alone, we’ve celebrated milestone birthdays across the team — 30, 40, 50. We’re not just working side by side. We’re walking through life stages together.

That’s why people stay for as long as they do.

Because they know VeryCreatives is a place where you can grow AND feel safe. Where your work matters, but so does your life outside of it.

And when someone does eventually decide to move on?

They don’t just disappear. They stay part of the story. Some drop by for a beer. Others come back to work on new projects.

They leave a mark, and they always will.

The bottom line is this:

In a world that’s constantly shifting, it still matters (more than ever) to build something stable.

Not just a place where you can work. But a place where you can belong.

Helping startup founders & innovation labs validate and scale ideas into exit-ready products @ VeryCreatives | 🔥 Two decades in tech

Almost every time, the founders joining our MVP validation sprints come with a crystal-clear product idea… or so they think:

They have a list of features, a target market, and a deadline.

They want us to say "yes, we love it" and build fast.

Instead, 9 times out of 10, we push back.

We challenge every assumption:
👉 "Why do you need this feature?"
👉 "Has any user actually asked for it?"
👉  "What’s the fastest way to test if people will pay?"

Yes, it causes tension. Nobody likes to have their vision picked apart.

But after 2 days of interviews and rapid prototyping, all the flaws in your core hypothesis start to show up.

Sometimes, this means we cut ~70% of the features people just don’t care about.

And that’s what we’re here for. We help you ditch the noise and focus on what actually will grow your SaaS in the early stages.

It’s not a clean-cut process. It gets messy (and annoying) sometimes.

But our goal is to get you to real validation, a leaner MVP, and a demo users get genuinely excited about.

If you want that and a team that won’t nod along, but challenge you: DM me.

How we go from idea →validated MVP in 6 weeks (step by step):

1. Week 0: Ruthless alignment

We start by killing the founder’s “pet features” and locking in the one problem that makes or breaks the business.

If you can’t explain your core value prop in one blunt sentence, you’re not ready to build.

2. Week 1: Real user interviews (no survey BS)

We get the founder out of their bubble.

Talk to 5-10 target users, live (not with a Google Form).

Ask about their last real pain, not “Would you use this?”

This is where most SaaS ideas die (and that’s a good thing).

3. Week 2: Risk mapping

We list every assumption that could destroy your business model.

Then we grab the riskiest one and design our MVP to smash it fast.

No “nice to haves.” Only “must have” proof.

4. Week 3–4: Design-driven build

We use wireframes to map just the critical user flow – nothing more.

Our dev team builds only what’s needed for a real-life test.

If it feels embarrassingly lean, you’re on the right track.

5. Week 5: First contact

We put your ugly MVP in front of real users.

We measure: 

👉 Will they pay?
👉 Will they switch?
👉 Will they commit?

Crickets or confusion? That’s data, not failure.

6. Week 6: Debrief

If users bite, we double down.

If not, we pivot or kill it.

Every week, clarity beats comfort.

Okay, but how is this sprint different from something you can do on your own?

You get:

👉 A full team (PM, design, dev, QA) running tight Agile sprints.

👉 Weekly reports, no black boxes.

👉 3 months of post-launch support – because the real learning really starts after launch.

More details in the first comment – check it out 👇

The mistake I still see after 15 years building SaaS:

Founders obsess over “v2” features because building feels safer than hearing “no.”

So they polish and perfect, hoping bells and whistles can distract from the core risk:

It happens every quarter.

Another founder sinks months into a slick analytics dashboard.

Custom charts, exports, Slack alerts… you name it.

But when launch day comes, nobody even uploads their first dataset.

The question I’m asking my clients is:

Will anyone care enough to use v0.5?

Every “nice to have” is just a shield against the real test.

And every hour spent hiding behind code is a bet that gets more expensive.

All you need is proof someone will bother to try your ugly, unfinished, brutally honest version.

Start hunting for rejection.

Tag a founder who needs to see this.

Cheap Verifier

Founder

Cheap Inboxes

SalesBlast.io

EmailBison

Official Advisor

EmailGuard

Let Pam

Vice President Operations

Freelance Smart Contract and Solidity Engineer

Freelance Solidity Developer

Wunderman Thompson Data

Solutions Engineer

Renaissance Learning

Programmer Analyst I

Hack Reactor

Completed Full-Stack Software Engineering Immersive

Software Engineering Student

Slinging Inboxes

I love creating. 

Since I was a kid I've always tinkered and been interested in how things work. 

In college I started investing in oil ETF's and other stocks. That got me started in finance. 

After having so many close friends who were creating apps and companies, I let my interest in these run wild and started my own software company. But. I wasn't coding...yet.

Finally, I've learned to code and can create whatever sparks my interest. I'm so excited to have finally made it and become a software engineer and keep following my passion...to create.

After learning to code I started learning marketing via email and LinkedIn. Since then I started my own agency, Salesblast.io, where we help B2B firms market their products and services.

Ben Rasmussen

You don't need a co-founder to build a successful business.
(This is going to be controversial but I don't care...)

The "find a co-founder" advice is overrated as hell.

Everyone loves the romantic story of two founders grinding it out together.

Jobs and Wozniak. Gates and Allen. Page and Brin.

Great. Cool stories.

But for every successful co-founder duo, there are 50 partnerships that imploded over equity disputes and different work ethics.

I built CheapInboxes solo. 

From $0 to $125K in 5 months. 

(And currently I'm making WAAAY more)

No co-founder.

Before that, I scaled my cold email agency solo. Multiple 6-figure years. No partner.

And here's why solo worked better for me:

→ Speed: I make decisions instantly. No debates about direction or strategy.
→ Equity: I keep 100%. Every dollar of profit is mine.
→ Accountability: If something breaks, I fix it. No finger-pointing.
→ Work ethic alignment: I work 10+ hour days. I don't need to convince anyone else to match that pace.

Could a co-founder have helped? Maybe.

But they also could have slowed me down, disagreed with my approach, or wanted to take the business in a direction I hated.

The real question isn't "should I find a co-founder?"

It's "do I actually need help with something I can't learn or outsource?"

If you need technical skills you don't have, hire a developer. 
If you need sales help, hire a closer. 
If you need operational support, hire a VA.

You don't need to give away 50% of your company to solve those problems.

Look, if you find someone you genuinely vibe with and trust completely, great.

But don't force it because some startup guru said you need a co-founder.

Build solo. Move fast. Keep your equity.

You'll be fine.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more content like this.

Customer service standards in this industry are absolutely broken.

People pay us hundreds monthly for inbox services. 

Then they apologize for asking basic questions.

This makes no sense.

You're the customer. 

Ask whatever you need.

But apparently the bar is so low that basic responsiveness feels like premium service. 

Clients are shocked when we actually answer their messages.

This tells you everything about our competition.

Most providers disappear after payment. 

Questions go unanswered for days. 

Support tickets get ignored completely.

So when we respond within hours, clients think we're doing something extraordinary. 

Actually we're not. 

We're just doing the bare minimum of customer service.

Answer messages. Fix problems quickly. Be available.

Somehow this qualifies as exceptional in the inbox provider space.

The opportunity here is massive. 

An entire industry exists where simply answering your phone makes you premium.

Most businesses fail at basics. 

They optimize fancy features while ignoring fundamental service quality.

Then they wonder why customers churn.

Your competitive advantage doesn't need to be revolutionary. It just needs to be reliable.

Respond fast. Solve problems. Be there when customers need you.

Everything else is secondary.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more business insights.

You can't get elite results doing average shit.

Simple as that.

I see agencies complaining about 1-2% response rates while sending 200 emails per day.

Then they wonder why they're broke.

You know what?

You can't have elite cold email results AND do what everyone else does.

Pick one.

Elite results mean 5%+ response rates consistently. 
Meetings flooding your calendar. 
Pipeline so full you're turning people away.

That doesn't come from "best practices."

It comes from doing things that seem insane to average senders.

The volume that works? It seems crazy.

3K-5K emails per day minimum. 

Some of my best-performing clients at CheapInboxes are sending 8K-10K daily.

To the average agency owner, that sounds unhinged.

"Won't that hurt deliverability?" 
"Isn't that spam?" 
"Shouldn't we focus on quality over quantity?"

No. You're just scared.

Scared to send volume because it feels aggressive. 
Scared prospects will get mad. 
Scared you'll look desperate.

Meanwhile the top performers stopped caring what it "looks like" years ago.

They care about what works.

And what works is simple math:

More emails sent = more responses received = more meetings booked.

You want 5%+ response rates? You need volume.

Not 500 emails per week. Not 1K per day.

Real volume. The kind that makes average senders uncomfortable.

Because average effort gets average results.

If you're doing what everyone else does, you'll get what everyone else gets. 

Which is mediocre pipeline and constant stress about where next month's revenue is coming from.

Elite performers operate differently.

They send more. 
They test faster. 
They move with aggression that seems borderline crazy to people stuck at $10K/month.

This is why most agencies stay small.

Not because cold email doesn't work. 

Because they're not willing to do what actually works.

They want elite results with safe, comfortable execution.

Doesn't exist.

Pick one: Stay average and comfortable, or go hard and print money.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more content like this.

Taking action beats reading about action every single time.

People love asking "what should I learn before I start cold email?"

Wrong question.

The right question is "how fast can I send my first 1,000 emails?"

I see this constantly. 

People stuck in learning mode for months.
Reading every blog post about deliverability. 
Watching every YouTube video about subject lines. 
Downloading every "proven template" they can find.

Then they send 50 emails and wonder why nothing happens.

Poor soul.

When I started, I found a friend who needed clients. 

Set up cold email automation. Sent volume. Booked 3 meetings the first day.

Was my copy perfect? No. 
Did I know everything about deliverability? No. 
Did I have the "optimal setup"? No!

But I took action. And action creates feedback.

Feedback tells you what's actually broken.

You can't get that from reading.

The biggest lesson I've learned in business:

Doing it teaches you more than studying it ever will.

"How do I get better at sales calls?" 
Do more sales calls.

"How do I improve my cold email response rates?" 
Send more cold emails and test different offers.

"How do I scale my agency?" 
Get more clients and figure out the operations as you grow.

Everyone wants the blueprint before they start.

But the blueprint only makes sense after you've done it.

You learn by doing. Not by preparing to do.

I built Cheapinboxes to be the #1 inbox provider on the Internet because I executed fast.

And DEFINITELY not because I had perfect knowledge.

The market will teach you everything you need to know.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more content like this.

Cold emailers are optimizing the WRONG metrics.

They obsess over open rates like it's a scorecard.

"I got 42% opens this week!"

Cool. How many meetings did you book?

"Uh... zero."

Open rates don't pay your rent.

I've run cold email campaigns for years. 

Booked thousands of meetings for clients.

And the pattern is obvious:

High performers track: response rates, meetings booked, deals closed. 
Low performers track: open rates, click rates, domain health scores.

One group focuses on revenue. 
The other focuses on vanity metrics.

And I'd rather have a 12% open rate with 8 booked calls than a 50% open rate with 1 reply.

Every single time.

Because at the end of the month, only one of those scenarios pays bills.

What actually matters are THESE:

1) Does your prospect respond? Yes or no. 
2) Did they book a call? Yes or no. 
3) Did they become a client? Yes or no.

Everything else is just data designed to make you feel busy.

"But Ben, doesn't a higher open rate mean better deliverability?"

Maybe. 

Or maybe it means your subject line is clickbait and your email is trash.

I've seen campaigns with 18% open rates book 15 meetings per week.

I've seen campaigns with 55% open rates book zero.

The difference is just the offer.

One had something prospects actually wanted. 
The other was just good at getting people to click.

So start optimizing for outcomes.

Your bank account will thank you.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more content like this.

People ask me which inbox provider they should use.

Well, they're all giving you the same Google Workspace accounts. 

The product is identical.

A Google from one provider works exactly like a Google from another provider. 

You're not getting magic deliverability from specific vendors.

The only real difference is:

Response time when something breaks.

Does your provider answer in 12 hours or 5 days?

That's the entire competitive landscape.

Most providers take days to respond to urgent issues. 

Your domains get suspended and they ghost you. 

Your campaigns die while you wait for support.

We respond fast. Problems get fixed same day.

This shouldn't be revolutionary. 

But in an industry where customer service is terrible, basic responsiveness becomes your differentiator.

Stop overthinking provider selection. 
Stop searching for secret deliverability advantages.

Ask one question: How fast do they fix problems?

If the answer is "within hours," you found the right provider. 

If the answer is "eventually," keep looking.

The product matters less than the service. 

Everyone sells the same thing.

Choose based on who actually shows up when you need them.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more inbox insights.

Volume isn't killing your deliverability. 

Your infrastructure is.

I've watched dozens of agencies throttle their campaigns because some "deliverability expert" convinced them sending over 500 emails per day would destroy their sender reputation.

Complete nonsense.

These same agencies wonder why they're booking 3 meetings per month while competitors sending 5,000+ daily are crushing it.

The brainwashing runs deep in this industry.

Somewhere along the line, cold emailers started believing that low volume equals high deliverability. 

That if you just send fewer emails with more "personalization," you'll magically land in the inbox.

This creates a poverty mindset around outreach.

You're not protecting your deliverability by sending 200 emails per day. 

You're protecting yourself from actually testing if your offer works.

Real deliverability issues come from bad infrastructure. 

→ Cheap domains 
→ Poor sender reputation
→ Terrible targeting that generates spam complaints.

Not from volume itself.

I've run campaigns at 10,000+ sends daily with better inbox rates than agencies sending 500. 

The difference → Proper setup + Quality domains + Actual list hygiene.

Meanwhile agencies are debating whether 300 or 400 sends is "safe" while their business starves from lack of pipeline.

Backward approach entirely.

If you're genuinely worried about deliverability, invest in infrastructure. 

Get proper domains. 
Use legitimate sending tools. 
Target better prospects who actually want what you're selling.

But don't convince yourself that staying small is strategic.

You're not being careful with deliverability. 

You're being careful with growth. 

And that caution is the real threat to your business.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email reality.

Hyper-personalization in cold email doesn't work.

I've run campaigns across dozens of industries. 

Tested every personalization strategy people swear by.

The results were consistently mediocre.

That opening line about someone's LinkedIn post feels forced. 

Prospects see right through it.

"Hey Sarah, loved your recent post about Q4 marketing challenges..."

This screams automated outreach. 

And almost everyone uses this exact template now.

Your prospect knows you didn't actually care about their post. 

They know you're running this at scale. 
The fake personalization insults their intelligence.

What actually works? Clear value propositions.

Leading with how you solve their specific problem beats mentioning their content every time. 

Prospects care about results, not whether you stalked their social media.

Most agencies waste hours researching prospects for personalization that tanks conversion rates. 

They could spend that time refining their offer or sending more volume.

The math is brutal.

Sending 5,000 emails with simple value-focused copy outperforms sending 500 hyper-personalized emails. 

Every single time.

Stop torturing yourself with LinkedIn research and stop pretending you care about their recent webinar.

Lead with value. Make your offer clear. Send volume.

Personalization is a crutch for weak offers.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email reality.

Personalization is the most overrated tactic in cold email.

Every struggling agency I've consulted spends 30+ minutes researching each prospect. 

→ Reading LinkedIn posts. 
→ Finding personal details. 
→ Crafting custom openers.

Then they send 50 emails per week and wonder why they're broke.

This industry has convinced people that personalization is mandatory for success. 

That you need to mention someone's recent promotion or comment on their company news to get a response.

Wrong approach entirely.

Personalization works in extremely specific situations. 

High-ticket enterprise deals. 
Strategic partnerships. 
Situations where one client represents six-figure revenue.

That's maybe 1% of outreach scenarios.

The other 99% of the time, you're burning hours to feel productive. 

You're researching prospects instead of testing offers. 

You're optimizing tactics instead of validating if anyone wants what you're selling.

This creates a convenient excuse for low volume.

"I only sent 200 emails this month because I personalized each one" sounds better than "I'm scared to send volume because I might get rejected at scale."

But the math doesn't lie.

Agencies sending 5,000 generic emails with strong offers outperform agencies sending 500 "personalized" emails every single time. 

It's not even close.

Your prospects don't need you to prove you can Google them. 

They need you to prove you can solve their problem profitably.

Meanwhile personalization obsessed agencies are crafting the perfect opener while competitors are booking 20 meetings per week with two-sentence emails.

The "what if this prospect is special?" argument justifies staying small. 

You're protecting your ego from rejection at scale, not protecting response rates.

If your offer is strong, basic targeting works. 

If your offer is weak, no amount of personalization saves it.

Stop using research as procrastination. 

Test your offer at volume. 

Let the market tell you if people want what you're selling.

Personalization should be the exception, not the default strategy.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email reality.

taplio

The Battle

Ferenc Fekete

Ben Rasmussen

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreFerenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBen Rasmussen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Ferenc Fekete

Ben Rasmussen

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Ferenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBen Rasmussen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreFerenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance