The most common mistake is scoping an MVP as a smaller version of the final product, instead of the smallest thing that tests the risky assumption. Those are very different briefs.
A minimum viable product is not a cheap version of your idea. It is an experiment with a specific question attached: will anyone use this, will they pay for it, and is the hard part actually hard? Scoped that way, six weeks is enough. Scoped as “the full product but smaller”, six months is not.
The discipline is deciding what the riskiest assumption is and building only what tests it. If the risk is whether people will pay, you need a payment path and almost nothing else. If the risk is whether the core technical problem is solvable, you need that solved and can fake the rest of the interface. Most founders instinctively build the parts they are confident about, because those are comfortable to build.
Everything not serving the experiment is deferred: admin panels, settings pages, onboarding flows, edge cases, the second user role. These are all real work that a real product eventually needs. None of them tell you whether the idea works.
We build MVPs on the same mainstream stack as everything else — React, Node or Python, PostgreSQL or Supabase — because a successful MVP has to be extendable. Throwaway prototypes become production systems more often than anyone plans for, and it is expensive when the foundation cannot take the weight.
Fixed price, fixed scope, agreed in writing before anything starts. You own everything on day one.
We identify what actually has to be true for this to work, and which of those is riskiest. That decides the entire scope.
What gets built, and an explicit written list of what does not. The second list is the one that keeps six weeks to six weeks.
The functionality that tests the assumption, built properly rather than mocked, on React, Node or Python and PostgreSQL or Supabase.
If willingness to pay is the question, a real payment path is not optional.
Live on Vercel or AWS with a domain, not a demo on somebody's laptop.
Event tracking on the actions that constitute your evidence, so launch produces data rather than anecdotes.
Somewhere for early users to arrive and convert, because a product with no front door gets no users.
What the data says, and an honest read on whether to extend, pivot or stop.
* Indicative starting prices in USD. Final quotes scoped per project — VAT handled for UAE & EU clients.
This works when there is a real question to answer and a founder ready to act on the answer.
It is the wrong shape of engagement here:
MVP building starts from $7,500, an indicative starting price in USD. The final quote depends on what the riskiest assumption is and what it takes to test it — a payment-validation MVP and a technically hard core-algorithm MVP are very different builds at very different prices.
Yes, when it is scoped as an experiment rather than as a smaller version of the finished product. The six weeks is protected by the not-built list, which we agree in writing before starting. Scope changes mid-build are what turn six-week projects into six-month ones.
An MVP is built to answer a question and is deliberately incomplete. A web application is built to run a business process reliably, with the roles, admin tooling and edge cases that implies. Many clients do the MVP first and the application afterwards, once the question is settled.
Then it did its job, at a fraction of what finding out later would have cost. That outcome is worth the same money as a positive one, which is why we ask up front whether you are prepared to act on a negative result.
Yes. You own everything on day one, in your repository, on a mainstream stack. If you take it to another team afterwards, they can pick it up — that is exactly why we do not build MVPs on throwaway foundations.
Often, yes, and we build assuming it might. That is why MVPs ship on the same stack as our production applications. It will still need the deferred work — admin tooling, edge cases, additional roles — but the foundation will hold.