Every indie product eventually hits the same fork: freemium or premium? Cap the free tier so people have to upgrade — or give enough away that the product is genuinely useful without a credit card? And when you do that after having spent months of your time working on something - only to GIVE IT AWAY - you have other people looking at you saying, and I paraphrase here: “huh?, why?”.
Days before the Windows release, Expressed Starter still had a 25-minute session limit (borrowed from a limit imposed by a well known video conferencing app) and a hard cap of two people connected - because, well, just because. On paper it looked responsible - push people to upgrade.
The question that actually matters
With zero users, “can this make money?” is the wrong primary question. Important later. Not first.
The primary question is simpler and harder: is the product useful for other people?. Useful enough that someone runs a real lesson, a real coaching call, a real explanation — and comes away with something like “wow - that was cool”.
As a solo founder I’m not convinced yet that this isn’t just a fancy idea I happen to love - this is the why - this is the reason I decided to push whats there for free, the whole pro thing I can deal with later - it’s not like features are hard to build these days. Other people liking the idea is cheap. Other people liking it enough to actually use it is the only signal that counts.
You don’t get that signal from a free tier that expires mid-session or kicks the third person out of the room.
What shipped instead
Starter is the full live experience: same frame rate as Pro, unlimited session length, up to ten people. Recordings carry a watermark (yay for free advertising); Pro removes it. New tools will land in Pro first when they’re ready.
That is a freemium shape — just not the hostile kind. The free product has to be something you could use without feeling punished. If it isn’t, I’m not validating Expressed. I’m validating whether people will tolerate a crippled demo.
Monetization stays on the map
None of this means money doesn’t matter. Building software costs time and infrastructure; Pro exists for a reason. Watermark-free recordings and early access to new tools are honest upgrades — not artificial walls around the core loop.
But sequencing matters. First prove that live sketching on a shared screen is something anyone uses. Then refine what belongs in Starter vs Pro with real usage behind the decision — not fear of giving too much away before anyone arrived.
If you wanna sketch over video, try Starter on Windows. Tell me whether it survives a real session. That’s the feedback I’m shipping for.