Buildr

"Super.so but cheaper and faster" — I've seen this pitch a hundred times. This is the nth entrant in the "Notion publishing tools" race that also included Fruition, Potion, Feather, and a dozen others who all had the same comparison table dunking on Super.so. The static generation angle is not new. The problem is the market ceiling: Notion publishers are a tiny niche of a niche, Super.so's actual paying user base is not that large, and you're fighting for scraps while Notion itself keeps expanding its native publishing features. The waitlist with no timeline, no team page, and no working demo is the classic pre-product signal that this might never ship. That Lighthouse 97 screenshot is a mock-up of a fake blog, not a real customer site. Grudgingly: the copy is tight and the positioning is clean. "Super.so charges you $16 every month for a slow site that still looks like Notion. We thought that was stupid." That's a real hook, and the 97 vs 34 Lighthouse comparison is concrete and credible. If you actually ship and get ten real customer sites showing those scores, this could convert well. The $9 flat pricing removes all the friction that nickel-and-dime tier structures create. Focus on getting five paying beta users and putting their real sites in that mockup window instead of "Alex's Blog." That swap alone would do more for conversion than any copy change.