# Marcus Delgado, Independent Developer / Aspiring SaaS Founder — read of SecureAI, June 23 2026

> "7 years backend engineering at mid-size companies, now freelance, actively hunting for a productizable idea I can build nights and weekends. Two kids, 7 and 4. I listen to My First Million on my commute to the coworking space."

## How I got here

Someone on X posted something like "finally a startup idea site that shows you the ugly numbers upfront" and linked to Wishdeal Factory. I clicked around and landed on this one because I've been building with Cursor a lot lately and I've genuinely wondered how safe my own stuff is. Searched for "security audit AI generated code" last week and found nothing actionable. So the name pulled me in.

## What I clicked first

The hero tagline: "Security audits for AI-built SaaS." That's exactly the thing I've been Googling. I expected a tool I could point at my repo. What I got was something different, and it took me a minute to figure out what I was actually looking at.

This is not a security audit product. This is a business idea you can buy. The product being sold here is a playbook for starting a security audit company. Once I understood that, the whole page reframed itself. That reframe took longer than it should have.

## Where I paused

The line: "Honest disclosure: we don't have live customers on this idea yet. We shipped the strategy package; you ship the customer conversations."

I stopped there for a while. That is either the most honest thing I've ever read on a landing page or a very clever way to disclaim all responsibility. Maybe both. I genuinely do not know which one. But I kept reading because of it, which tells me something.

## What I distrusted

The self-scoring. "credibility: 9/10." "buyer clarity: 10/10." These are the scores Wishdeal gave to its own idea. That is grading your own paper and then citing the grade as a signal of quality. And then right below it: "financial upside: 1/10." They scored their own product a 1 out of 10 on financial upside. Which... fine, I respect the honesty, but combined with "$-20,000 Year-1 take-home (Fermi)" and "1 in 8 Meaningful-success odds," I'm reading an idea pitch that has pre-argued itself into "probably not worth it." If the shop that built this strategy package scored it a 1 on financial upside, why am I buying the dossier for $5?

I also don't know what "Fermi" means as a qualifier here. I assume it's a Fermi estimate, i.e., a guess. But it's presented with a dollar figure and a ratio that look precise. That kind of dressed-up uncertainty makes me twitch.

## What would convince me

I want to see one person who bought the $99 tier and did anything with it. Not a polished case study. A Loom, a tweet thread, a substack post from someone named Kevin in Ohio who spent three weekends building the MVP and got 12 beta users. The format doesn't matter. The existence of a real human who tried this and has something to say about it matters a lot.

Also: what is in the "working code starter"? That's the one thing that might actually change my behavior. Is it a GitHub repo? A Cursor workspace? A set of prompts? The adopt tier says "working code starter, brand assets, copy library, and outreach pack" and I have no mental image of any of that.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. The page scores financial upside at 1/10 and estimates negative $20k in year one. What does the person who buys the $99 tier actually do with this on day 1, and what does success look like at 90 days, concretely?

2. When you say "working code starter" in the adopt tier, what exactly ships? A repo I can deploy, a scaffold, something else?

3. Has anyone bought this idea yet, and if so, can I talk to them for 15 minutes?

## Verdict: on-the-fence

The transparency about failure odds and negative returns is unusual enough that I haven't closed the tab yet. But I can't tell if the $5 dossier is a genuine information product or a cover for a model that only works if I eventually hire the team at the custom tier.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-06-23. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*