Startup Struggles Rewriting Apps and Finding Users

Fixr Startup's Downfall: A mobile app expert's journey. A failed startup involving bad code, co-founder conflicts, and lack of traction. The author learned valuable lessons, spotting red flags, and moved on to a promising startup opportunity.

• Startup "Fixr" aimed to connect car owners with mechanics.
• The founding team consisted of a CFO (innovation manager), CMO (legal associate), and COO (mechanic).
• Fixr had been operating for almost 3 years, with limited tangible progress.
• They had secured a personal bank loan for funding, won a local pitch contest, and secured a SEIS scheme registration.
• Extensive market research showed mechanics were interested in joining the platform upon launch.
• They developed a financial model projecting significant revenue growth with seed funding.
• They had a static landing page and 4 apps (customer/mechanic, iOS/Android) that were mostly built.
• Previous development work by overseas contractors for 2 years resulted in apps that were not production-ready, with issues like outdated screen dimensions and incomplete integrations.
• The author was brought in as an advisor due to his mobile app expertise.
• Communication with the development agency involved significant resistance and "gaslighting" regarding bug fixes and scope.
• The author suggested a full rewrite of the apps due to the state of the existing code.
• Demonstrating a quick prototype, the author convinced the co-founders to pursue a rewrite, leading to him being provisionally appointed as cofounder and CTO.
• An Android developer, Gus, was also brought on board.
• Original equity contracts had a "spicy clause" allowing the management team to unilaterally reduce or remove developer equity based on performance, which was later amended to "gross negligence" after legal advice.
• Gus and the author rewrote the apps during the COVID-19 lockdown, building a functional MVP with core features for posting jobs, payment, inspections, and invoicing.
• Despite the functional MVP, the co-founders continuously pushed to expand the scope with more features (roadside recovery, MOT checks, etc.).
• The author and Gus pushed back, advocating for launch rather than further development.
• The apps were released but received "crickets" (zero users, zero revenue, zero funding).
• The lack of users revealed deeper issues beyond product development.
• The co-founders had internal conflict (Jimmy vs. Mike), requiring mediation.
• Equity reallocation was reportedly capricious, with the author and Gus protected by their contract.
• The author attempted to bootstrap the marketplace by recruiting mechanics and running social media ads.
• A meeting with a CTO from a large UK car recovery company occurred, but the Fixr team lacked traction data (zero sign-ups, zero jobs) and the CFO oddly focused on a referral banking partnership.
• The author realized they were doing significant unpaid work.
• The author left Fixr after being offered a co-founder position at a different startup, Carbn, which showed more promising signs (bootstrapping founder, validated market niche, funded design work, clear equity process).
• Gus also left Fixr.
• Fixr dissolved after the developers left, highlighting the reliance on their work.
• The author reflects that despite the negative aspects, he "loved every minute of it" because he was actively building and involved in all aspects of the startup.
• The experience, though exploitative, provided valuable learned lessons that uniquely qualified him for the role at Carbn.
• The author suggests that a difficult startup journey can be beneficial for early-career professionals.
• Red flags identified include: long operation without launch, equity tied to personal loans, co-founder infighting, unclear roles/contributions of co-founders, inefficient technical decisions (e.g., building multiple native apps prematurely), placing too much value on pitch competitions over user validation, lack of in-person interaction, the difficulty of marketplace startups (especially with infrequent/expensive transactions), vague responses from VCs about traction, and not being thoroughly vetted as a sign they are desperate for free labor.