# Tom Garibaldi, Founder (ex-Sales Director) at self/solo — read of competitor-battle-card-generator, May 18 2026

> 5 years closing enterprise SaaS deals, now 8 months into building small B2B tools for sales teams, one product live with 14 paying customers.

## How I got here

Someone I follow on X, maybe 4k followers, builds micro-SaaS tools on the side, dropped this link with a short note about "interesting factory model, worth a look." I had a 20-minute gap between calls. I'd been loosely aware that battle card software was a real category -- Klue, Battlecards, Crayon -- so I was curious what angle this was taking and whether the market was actually as saturated as it looks.

## What I clicked first

The demo output in the middle of the page. They show a generated card with actual specific content: "Four to six weeks to first card. Heavy implementation services attached. Pricing not published, so SMB buyers bounce." That's the kind of output that makes a product demo feel real. Most pages in this space show a generic screenshot with placeholder copy. This one picked Klue by name and did the actual thing. That pulled me in.

## Where I paused

"Honest disclosure: we don't have live customers on this idea yet."

I had to re-read that twice. Up to that point the page reads like a live SaaS I could sign up for right now. Hero copy, an interactive-looking demo, a pricing table, a "Generate free card" CTA. And then buried in the lower third, next to the adoptability score, there's that sentence. So this is an idea for a product, not the product itself. The "Generate free card" button presumably doesn't go anywhere real. That's a genuinely disorienting page experience and it changes everything about how I read the top half in retrospect.

## What I distrusted

The financial estimates are doing a lot of work they shouldn't. "$-15,800 Year-1 take-home (Fermi)" is projected income for whoever BUILDS this, not a user outcome or a real metric from real customers. "$42M Estimated category TAM" with zero sourcing. "1 in 6 Meaningful-success odds" is oddly specific for a number that is basically a guess.

The Fermi math framing is clearly trying to signal intellectual honesty, but it ends up feeling like Wishdeal grading Wishdeal. The same studio that produced this idea is also the one scoring it 72 out of 100. That's the self-grading loop problem.

And then this admission: "pain intensity: 4/10" sitting in the Concerns column. That is a notable thing to publish on a page whose headline is "Stop sending reps into competitive deals guessing at objections." A 4 out of 10 on pain intensity is telling on yourself.

## What would convince me

Two things. First, show the actual working tool, or a Loom of someone generating a card and pushing it to Slack in real time. The demo card text on the page is good, but a 90-second screen recording of the thing actually running would do more than any stat here.

Second, one customer story. It does not need to be a logo or a case study PDF. Even "a founder, 3 reps deep, used this card before a demo against a Salesforce-backed incumbent and closed the deal" is enough. The "Founder selling deal-by-deal" section describes the use case well and the writing is specific, but there is not one example of it actually happening to a real person.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. The "Generate free card" button -- is there an actual working product I can touch right now, or is the demo card on the page the whole product experience at this stage?

2. The $99 adopt tier says "working code starter." What does that actually mean -- a Next.js repo I clone and deploy myself, or something more involved? How long does it realistically take someone who can ship code but is not a full-stack engineer to go from code starter to live product?

3. You scored pain intensity at 4/10 on your own idea. That is the single number that determines whether people pay money. What is your actual read on why someone would choose this over just keeping their Notion battle card doc updated?

## Verdict: on-the-fence

The demo output is specific and credible, and publishing a negative Fermi projection on your own product page is genuinely unusual. But the page opens as if I'm buying a subscription tool and closes asking me to adopt a business idea, and until I know whether there's a working product to actually try, I don't have enough to do anything with this.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-05-18. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*