Fair point on the tiny cohort. You're right - 9 users isn't enough to validate an archetype.
Marketing strategy: None, really. 99% organic from Play/App Store discovery. Spent $1,300 on ads over 3 years, negligible results. No content marketing (tried, spent ~20k$ on an instagram account, gained 50 followers), no SEO, no outreach (apart from irregular reddit shills). Just ship features and hope App Store algorithms pick it up.
Had one viral spike in Poland (June 2025, ~1,600 users) but don't know the source - maybe a YouTuber review, maybe App Store featuring. GA4 misattributed it to paid ads which didn't exist.
The irony: I think I accidentally built something that works for a specific archetype (regular schedules + decision fatigue), but I've been marketing it as a general habit tracker to everyone. Which explains the 4.2% D1 retention - 95% are wrong-fit users.
But I can't niche down based on 9 users who won't even respond to my emails.
You're right. 10-20 DAU from 35k installs is catastrophic.
Of those 10-20 DAU, probably 8-10 are the power users who use it 7/7 days (Level 100+ users, CV <0.5). So yes, sticky users exist but they're <0.1% of
installs.
I'm not 'focusing on monetization' - I gave up on retention months ago. Tried:
- 4 onboarding rebuilds
- AI coaching
- Gamification (quests, XP)
- WearOS app
- Daily notifications
- Early wins in first session
D1 retention stayed at 4.2% through all of it. Nothing moved the needle.
So I shifted to: 'Can I monetize the 10-20 who stuck?' Answer: No. They won't pay because free tier is complete.
You're saying I should fix retention first. Fair. But after months of trying and 0.0% improvement, at what point do you accept the category is broken or the product doesn't work for 99% of people?
The 'hocus pocus' analysis was trying to understand if the 1% who stick have patterns I can replicate. They do (regular schedule + high cognitive load). But I can't find more of them or get them to pay.
This resonates. I do the same - use free tools, only pay when forced.
You nailed it: 'If people aren't upgrading, the free version might be enough.' That's exactly my problem. Level 177 user completes 800+ habits/month on free tier.
So I either:
1. Lock core features - risk losing the 9 power users
2. Keep it generous - accept it won't monetize
3. Shut down
Question: on your website, did you experiment with limiting free usage? Or accept it's a free tool with optional donations?
Right now, paying for my app DOES make you a sucker - the Level 177 user proves it. She gets full value free.
The Kagi model Lee mentioned above would flip this: free tier is limited (50-100 completions/month), heavy users pay to continue. Then paying makes you smart (you're getting 800 completions/month for $5), not a sucker.
But that requires confidence the core is worth paying for. And based on my conversion data (0.8%), most people try it and decide it's not.
So maybe the real issue is: the core isn't valuable enough to limit. And if I can't confidently say 'this is worth paying for after 100 uses,' then I don't have a product.
- Age: 40% are 18-24, 20% are 25-34
- Gender: 50/50 split (males have 2x longer sessions)
- Location: Was mostly US/UK/Russia historically, but had an organic viral spike in Poland (June 25) that I can't trace - install referrer tracking broke. Source unknown (YouTube/TikTok?), ~2k installs.
- Platform: 92% Android, 8% iOS (iOS converts at 6.88% vs Android 1.07%)
The 9 power users I described are from the pre-spike era. The actual bulk of my users now might be younger/different demographic from Poland, but I can't interview them to find out.
Power users like the Level 177 user are getting unlimited value from the core. They complete 800+ habits/month on the free tier. The extras aren't compelling enough to upgrade.
Kagi model applied to Respawn would be: free tier gets 50-100 completions/month. If you're crushing it like the Level 177 user (800/month), you pay to keep using the core.
This makes more sense than what I'm doing. I'm trying to monetize peripherals when the core is what they value.
The risk: does limiting completions kill the habit-building momentum? If someone hits their limit mid-month, breaks their streak, do they just churn instead of convert?
But worth testing. It's at least aligned with value - heavy users pay, light users stay free.
This might be it. Free tier includes: habit tracking, ritual creation (no alarms), timers, journaling, basic history. Premium unlocks: alarms, AI chat, infinite history, analytics, extra quest.
Power users use alarms + timers heavily according to interviews. But two of them (Level 148 and 177) have zero subscriptions (never paid), so either they found workarounds or alarms aren't as critical as I thought.
The weird part: AI Chat has 11.54% conversion rate when users discover it (vs 0.8% overall). But only 2.4% of users even find it. So there's ONE feature that works, but it's buried and most power users never see it.
Maybe the answer is: make AI chat the core experience, not a locked bonus feature?
Fair point. Two of my Level 100+ users have zero subscriptions - the free tier works for them. But here's the twist: I DO have paywalls (alarms, AI chat, analytics, infinite history). They just don't care about those features, or work around them. The one power user who IS paying (CV 0.86, irregular schedule) stopped using it 7 months ago but forgot to cancel. So the question becomes: are the wrong features locked? Or do power users just not need premium features?
I even ran an A/B test (hard vs soft paywall):
- Started by "recommendation" from popular entrepreneur
- 3 months, 3k users
- Baseline (soft paywall, can skip): 0.8% conversion
- Hard paywall (must activate trial): 0.6% conversion
- Revenue tracking broken (Firebase showed $0 both variants)
- Killed experiment yesterday.
Built this solo as a side project alongside day job. No external funding, 100% bootstrapped. $45k cash reserves gives me runway, but 3 years with these metrics has me questioning if there's a path forward.
Tech stack: Kotlin Multiplatform, Compose Multiplatform, targeting Android/iOS/WearOS. 99% crash-free rate, 4.2* rating. The app works - users just don't stick or pay.
The regularity pattern (CV) analysis was eye-opening: active power users have CV <0.5 (consistent daily routine), churned power users have CV >0.7 (boom-bust). But when I analyzed paying customers, only 15% match this pattern. Most revenue comes from people who try it briefly and churn within 1-2 billing cycles.
If anyone wants to dig into the data, I'm happy to share:
- Anonymized GA4 exports
- SQL queries for usage pattern analysis
- Onboarding flow breakdowns
- Retention cohort data
Posting this because after 3 years I'm stuck between "one more pivot" and "shut it down." Hoping someone sees what I'm missing.
Marketing strategy: None, really. 99% organic from Play/App Store discovery. Spent $1,300 on ads over 3 years, negligible results. No content marketing (tried, spent ~20k$ on an instagram account, gained 50 followers), no SEO, no outreach (apart from irregular reddit shills). Just ship features and hope App Store algorithms pick it up.
Had one viral spike in Poland (June 2025, ~1,600 users) but don't know the source - maybe a YouTuber review, maybe App Store featuring. GA4 misattributed it to paid ads which didn't exist.
Competitors: - Free: Habitica (gamified), Todoist, Google Tasks - Freemium: Productive, Habitify, Strides (3-5 free habits, pay for more) - Paid upfront: Streaks ($5 one-time) - Coaching: Fabulous ($70/year), Noom ($60/month) - Niche: Focus Bear (ADHD), Routinery ($4/mo, routines focused)
The irony: I think I accidentally built something that works for a specific archetype (regular schedules + decision fatigue), but I've been marketing it as a general habit tracker to everyone. Which explains the 4.2% D1 retention - 95% are wrong-fit users.
But I can't niche down based on 9 users who won't even respond to my emails.