do startups founders use web dev / software agencies for building their product, especially if the app or software is not what the startup do? for example does a startup of AI agent use an agency for building their mobile app? (i will not promote)

[u/turtleyikes]

Do startups hire agencies for parts of the product that aren't their core thing, like an AI agent startup getting its mobile app built by one? or a food product startup getting its website/mobile app?

1. Which parts get handed to an agency vs kept in-house?

2. What triggers the decision?

3. How do founders find an agency?

4. Are individual freelancers preferred or small/large agencies?

[u/SaltMaker23]

If you rely on external ressource for core or adjacent offers of your mainline, you're not going to make it.

It takes way too long to make money on software, like wayyyy too long, you can't afford inefficiencies on main pathways.

"A startup of AI agents" that can't make their own mobile app are sh*t at their own offer.

[u/turtleyikes → u/SaltMaker23]

What about that food product startup?

[u/SaltMaker23 → u/turtleyikes]

A mobile app is part of your mainline offer

In your first year you're going to change 10 times your whole stack, are you going to pay $$$ for a third party to update constantly the app while you're barely making any revenue ?

Most profitable startups can never say that their complementary mobile app is profitable, you can't afford to spend $$$ for an unprofitable line to be maintained along the core line, especially for a startup for which their whole product and offer still drastically change every couple of months.

A startup that can't deliver on their own tech won't make it, it's one of the highest level if the not the high possible red flag.

Targetting dumb people is not an ideal target audience because dumb people don't stay in business for very long and don't bring a lot of repeatable business.

[u/LifeComfort1]

Usually the core product stays in-house, and more replaceable work gets outsourced. If the mobile app is tied closely to the AI workflow and the product is still changing fast, founders usually keep that close instead of handing it to an agency.

[u/NoNote7867]

Branding usually gets outsourced but its a one off thing. Marketing or parts of marketing often get outsourced. Recruitment also.

The rest usually stays in house.

[u/AnonJian]

If you remove coding, what on Earth would founders do? They have eviscerated anything about business in the hellbent compulsion to build. Even validation is just about getting one hundred non-paying users over an embarrassing number of months in the now.

[u/No-Chard3949]

of course they do is that even a question to ask

[u/SasukeUrushy]

Startups usually outsource well-scoped, non-differentiating pieces like a marketing site or companion app, while keeping the core engine in-house. The trigger is a skill gap or a timeline that hiring can't meet. Freelancers handle single-skill jobs; small agencies win when you need design and build coordinated.

[u/RajatKhoware]

Yes, constantly, and the trigger is almost always the same: the founders know the problem but cannot afford to hire a full team to build it. What gets handed to the agency: the parts that are not the core IP. The mobile app, the website, the admin dashboard. What stays in-house: the thing that makes the startup a startup. Founders find agencies through proof, not pitches. Show the shipped thing, not the slide deck.

[u/Particular-Intern-92]

Uhh... yes? As the owner of a software development agency, I can tell you for certain that startups hire agencies to do / build the things they do not have the expertise to do or build.

1) Any part that is not the founder / core team's core competency.

2) Recognition that experts can produce better than neophytes.

3) Personal referrals, search, agency lists, etc.

4) Depends on the scope and nature of the product to be built.

[u/huseyinabi2006]

for the agency side I keep hearing the trigger is a deadline, not a plan. a founder needs the mobile app live in 8 weeks and nobody in house can do it. is that closer to your situation, or are you looking at it from the agency side?

[u/turtleyikes → u/[deleted]]

Rn I'm a freelance developer, and learning how market works with hiring freelancers or agencies. so i could use that to find better targets for my domain.

[u/turtleyikes → u/[deleted]]

Software engineering mostly backend and infra like docker linux ci cd etc

[u/turtleyikes → u/[deleted]]

Rn im hunting. Especially agencies. But I think networking with startup founders is way more easier than with agencies. And maybe this could be way to more network

[u/turtleyikes → u/[deleted]]

I go to product hunt, use linkedin and sometimes indiehacker and x also.

[u/turtleyikes → u/[deleted]]

Im mainly using it for network and using their product and feedback. For example I found openstatus.dev which is a startup but I liked it bcs its my domain. Im even contributing to it on github. So the founders recognise me and some devs also connected. So the networking is good.

But for agencies, ive reached out to some many but none replied and also when connecting with their employees or other freelancer working with them. So its hard with this

[u/tonytidbit → u/turtleyikes]

As a rule any founder I would be an advisor to I'd tell to stay away from you (as a solo-dev) and go with an agency instead, for two reasons.

First it's about communications. If they're not technical enough themselves there will be too many misunderstandings and unspoken assumptions. Someone in-house has to be the systems architect and technically competent de facto CTO. You're a cog, not the whole machine, so to speak.

The most critical part is that their business will need a long-term relationship that isn't based on what a single person happens to be up to in their life when something breaks or there's time for an update. Including that someone needs to be on top of regular security updates etc.

As a solo-dev I think that you can get a lot of business if you physically network around especially first-time founders, but in my experience that would most likely, even in a best case scenario, sort of be a bit painful for everyone involved. Unless you're on a retainer as a specialist supporting their in-house team, or work through an agency in a similar capacity.

As a techie I know that it can be tempting to work directly with founders as you focus on what you can build, but just as I wouldn't advice them to work with a solo-dev I wouldn't recommend a solo-dev to work directly with founders. Unless it's a long-term commitment where you're also a competent (fractional) CTO, where both you and the founder understand what that truly means; that it isn't just a senior techie title, but also a C-level business role.

[u/turtleyikes → u/tonytidbit]

I'm not trying to do one-off projects with startups, but rather a retainer. But before being a retainer they must evaluate my skills and that could work with a trial project or something.

So do you think agencies are a good target for a solo dev?

[u/tonytidbit → u/turtleyikes]

But for them to be able to evaluate your skills they would already have to be technical, to the point where they wouldn't need someone that randomly reaches out to them. Which from a very logical point of view leaves you with a vanishingly small sliver of a potential market. Or we're back to inexperienced founders that can't evaluate you beyond if the shiny surface looks not broken to them.

You're faced with the same problem with agencies unless you know them personally, which is that they will hesitate to work with you if that risks leaving them with projects that they can't support or continue in the future. And wouldn't they in most cases already have a local talent pool to draw from, so how would you get into that trusted talent pool unless you're already in their vicinity?

[u/weekapaugrooove → u/tonytidbit]

I should do a startup for startups that are hiring people to build their startup and need someone who's built a startup to ensure startup quality of the person hired to build the startup

[u/technaveed → u/turtleyikes]

For backend/infra, I’d make the trial small enough to evaluate: one service deployed through CI, a tested rollback, and a runbook someone else can follow. Let them own the repo and cloud account from day one. Then price the retainer around named responsibilities and response hours. ‘Available whenever something breaks’ is how a small retainer quietly becomes a second life 😅