Michael Cruz

If you’re a US startup hiring mobile this quarter: screen for release ownership, not Flutter trivia. Senior candidates don’t separate “engineering” from “shipping.” They own releases, hotfixes, and the messy production stuff that actually matters. One question that works: “Tell me about a release that went sideways. What broke, how did you diagnose it, and what did you change so it wouldn’t happen again?” The answer tells you if they’ve actually owned production when it broke.

17

5 Comments

That $70/hour “senior developer” you hired is getting paid $3k/month and planning to leave. And you won’t hear about it from the agency. They’ll just write a vague email next quarter saying he’s “no longer available,” followed by a replacement dev who needs two weeks to onboard and another two to actually be useful. We’ve seen cases where a dev earning $4,000/month was billed at $12,000. And when they left, the client was not able to get a proper handoff. Most staff aug firms operate on a spread: the cheaper the developer, the more margin they make. Your success doesn’t factor in. Their job isn’t to find you the best engineer -it’s to maximize the gap between what you pay and what the dev earns. That model works great for them. Just not for you. We built Remotely as a transparent marketplace: developers set their own rates, keep 100% of it, and we charge a flat fee on top. None of that funny math and additional markup. It’s not a revolutionary idea. It’s just how this should have worked all along. If you want developers who stay longer and perform insanely better, start by not giving them a reason to leave.

830

72 Comments

Brian Lamb and his team at Promissory are building a modern platform for stacking trusts and maximizing QSBS. He answers all of the critical questions around how these trusts can be used, and who they're best suited for, on this week's episode of "QSBS, Solved". Listen: https://lnkd.in/eVjXnEKC

19

1 Comment

We sat down with the co-founder of a $1B tech company. He shared with us how engineering teams can leverage AI in ways no one has been thinking about. Most engineering teams aren't struggling with whether to use AI. They're struggling with how to extract real value from it. In July, we co-hosted an event with Guy Gur-Ari (co-founder, Augment Code) and Tushar Jain (CTO, Docker) to discuss what they are seeing in engineering teams. Guy pointed out that building with AI agents requires a fundamental shift in how engineers think about their craft. It's no longer about reading code, reasoning through it, refining it line by line. Working effectively with AI introduces a new skill entirely. It's about breaking problems down so intelligent systems can actually help. This shift takes time because you're rewiring decade-old habits, current workflows, and expectations. This Thursday, January 15th, we're hosting a small, off-the-record dinner for CXOs to have an honest conversation about one question I’m hearing everywhere: How are engineering teams actually getting real leverage from AI in code today? I'll be joined by Guy and Igor Ostrovsky (co-founders of Augment Code) and peers from Enrich - our private members-only network of CTOs and VPs of Engineering from companies like OpenAI, Slack, and Reddit. We'll share what's working, what's not, and how teams are adapting in practice - not theory. Comment if you're interested in joining; priority given to Enrich members.

47

4 Comments

Hard’ware is hard, especially in mobility. Dominated by offshore-manufacturing, which means we build business here and ship economic upside elsewhere. So grateful for the time with Chris Nolte, co-founder of Bloom, at Newlab Detroit. They’re not launching new factories, but solving for the missing middle in mobility manufacturing. Bringing visibility and access to production capacity that’s already here, just underutilized and siloed. Think: the auto stamping shop that could serve e-bike startups; the composites facility already capable of making mobility parts; electronics makers ready for micro-mobility systems. Bloom is connecting the dots, lowering risk for manufacturers and giving real, on-shore access. Over 97% of bicycles sold in the U.S. are imported, that isn’t a scarcity issue, it’s access. Bloom is proving there’s another path. At Lockstop we’re following the same logic in active transportation, taking what exists (a humble bike rack) and expanding it into something smarter: secure parking, better data, more trust.

55

6 Comments

Any best guesses on how long until Claude Code can: 1. Fire up the browser (without needing the MCP configuration) to evaluate changes 2. Fully leverage the Chrome Dev Tools 3. Use the Ruby debugger I’m finding Claude Code is creating fixes that would have been too tedious or painful. The gap right now is testing and debugging.

10

4 Comments

Reading Metronome’s Monetization Operating Model, I kept coming back to one idea: pricing has become product. Software now delivers outcomes, not access. Yet most companies still charge as if they’re selling seats or licenses. That disconnect creates friction: for customers, unpredictability; for companies, stalled growth. The paper’s argument is simple but sharp—monetization isn’t a late-stage decision. It’s strategic infrastructure. Pricing needs the same ownership and iteration as any feature. Treat it like a surface that customers touch, not a spreadsheet buried in finance. If value is continuous and dynamic, pricing must be as well. That means product, GTM, finance, and engineering working from one system of truth. How many of us still treat pricing as an afterthought—when it should be a growth engine? https://lnkd.in/gnH7WzYf #Monetization #ProductStrategy #AI

8

If you’re a FinTech founder hiring devs before defining your architecture—you’re already burning money. I’ve worked with dozens of early-stage platforms. The #1 pattern? Founders rush to build without clear: - Integration strategy (Plaid, Stripe, Dwolla, etc.) - Compliance roadmap - Modular backend that supports scale The result: rewrites, delays, and team churn. If you’re a non-technical founder navigating this, my advice: Start with a technical blueprint—before you touch code. I help founders build that plan and execute it fast. Let me know if you’re in this boat.

29

4 Comments

The majority of founders invest more in their AWS bill than their personal development. They'll spend $100K on engineering contractors but won't invest in understanding why they can't have difficult conversations with their cofounder. The founders who get to the top aren't just product geniuses. They're students of human psychology, starting with their own. They know that their company will only grow as fast as they do. The question isn't whether you have time for inner work. The question is whether you can afford not to do it.

11

4 Comments