What was the specific moment or frustration that made you decide to build Daylytix?

The turning point came while I was preparing yet another client audit and realised I was spending more time collecting and organising data than actually analysing it. I had one tool for crawling, another for performance, Google Search Console exports in CSV files, GA4 in a separate tab, and then documents and spreadsheets for turning everything into a report the client could understand. The audit itself was only part of the work. Bringing all the pieces together took much, much longer. I kept thinking that the valuable part of my job was deciding what mattered, why it mattered, and what should be fixed first - not copying data between 10 different tools. I had already built multiple smaller tools to automate parts of my own SEO workflow, so I started connecting them. What began as something practical for my own client work gradually grew into Daylytix. The goal was never to replace an SEO specialist or platforms like Screaming Frog, Ahrefs, Semrush, or other SEO tools. It was to automate the repetitive work so specialists could spend more time on strategy, problem-solving, and recommendations that actually require human experience.

What's one growth tactic that worked and one that completely flopped?

Since Daylytix is still pre-revenue, I would be exaggerating if I claimed to have found a proven growth tactic already. What has worked extremely well is extensive beta testing. Having real people use the platform helped me catch bugs, question assumptions, and improve workflows before pushing harder on acquisition. It also confirmed that some of the strongest opportunities were not just in technical SEO features, but in solving the everyday problems agencies deal with - managing clients, creating proposals, and generating invoices without switching between several tools. What has flopped, at least so far, is the marketing of the product itself. I know how to grow websites through SEO, but marketing an entire SaaS product is a completely different challenge. You need positioning, content, outreach, partnerships, demos, onboarding, and consistent distribution. Doing all of that properly requires either a team, enough funding to bring in help, or ideally both. Building the product and marketing it alone at the same time is much harder than I expected.

What do your customers complain about most, and how have you handled it?

The most common complaint from beta testers is that the interface can feel overwhelming. That is 100% my own fault. I kept building features to solve real problems, but eventually I had so many modules that the product started to look like a collection of powerful tools rather than one clear, connected workflow. I took that feedback seriously. I am now consolidating related modules, removing unnecessary steps, and reorganizing the platform around the tasks users actually want to complete, rather than around individual features. Prepare for v2.0! :) I have also hired an experienced UX professional who understands SEO, which was important to me. A general UX designer can improve how a screen looks, but someone with SEO experience also understands how specialists think, what data they need first, and how they move from identifying a problem to recommending a solution. The challenge right now is not adding more functionality, so I stopped building. My main goal right now is making everything I have already built look and feel simpler, clearer, and easier to use.

What's one thing about your market that most people get wrong?

I think most people assume that the value of an SEO/GEO tool comes from finding more issues and showing more data. Finding problems is actually the easy part. Almost any crawler can produce a long list of missing titles, broken links, slow pages, and technical warnings. The difficult part is understanding which issues genuinely affect performance, which ones should be fixed first, and how to explain that clearly to a client or development team. More data does not automatically lead to better decisions. In many cases, it's the opposite. That is why I believe SEO software should support human judgment rather than try to replace it. The tool should collect the data, connect the different signals, remove repetitive work, and help prioritize the findings. The specialist should still decide what matters in the context of the website, the business, and its goals. I believe a good SEO platform is not necessarily the one that gives you the largest report (albeit mine does that, too :)). It is actually the one that helps you move from data to action faster.

What's next for Daylytix in the next 6-12 months?

The next 6-12 months are mainly about turning Daylytix from a feature-rich beta product into something focused, stable, user-friendlier, and ready for a wider audience. My first priority is simplifying the interface. I built a lot of useful modules, but now I need to connect them into clearer workflows, improve the onboarding experience, and make it obvious what a user should do next instead of presenting them with dozens of separate tools. After that, the goal is an official launch supported by a serious marketing push. So far, most of my energy has gone into building and testing the product. The next stage is making sure the right people actually discover it, understand its value, and have a reason to try it. Customer feedback will be central to that process. I want the roadmap to be shaped by how agencies, consultants, and in-house teams use Daylytix in real work, not by adding features simply because they sound impressive. I will also be focusing heavily on stability, documentation, and removing friction from the first audit to the final client report. I already have more than enough features. The challenge now is making the product simpler compared to the collection of tools it replaces. By the end of that period, I want Daylytix to be officially launched, easier to use, better known, and shaped by a consistent feedback loop with real users.

Before you started building, what was your relevant experience? Had you worked in this industry, built other products, or were you starting from scratch?

I was not starting from scratch in SEO, but I was definitely starting from zero in some parts of building a SaaS business. Before Daylytix, I had spent more than a decade working in content, SEO, and digital publishing. I had written and edited content, managed editorial teams, built SEO strategies, carried out technical audits, worked on website migrations, and helped businesses improve their organic performance. Later, I founded my own SEO agency, TORO RANK, which gave me even more direct exposure to the daily problems consultants and agencies face. I was not only analyzing websites anymore. I also had to manage clients, prepare reports, explain technical issues, organize tasks, create proposals, and handle the business side of the work. I had also built several smaller tools before Daylytix, mainly to solve problems in my own workflow. These included an automated news-writing tool, a broken-link checker, an on-page SEO analysis tool, and a system for detecting poor or fake website translations. Building those tools showed me that many repetitive SEO tasks could be automated without removing the need for human judgment. What was new to me was combining everything into one commercial platform and building an interface for it. Coding a useful internal tool is one thing. Creating a SaaS product with authentication, billing, onboarding, UX, support, infrastructure, and marketing is a completely different challenge. So I had a lot of relevant industry experience and a clear understanding of the problems, but I had to learn the product and business side of SaaS while building it.

What's the biggest mistake you've made so far building this product, and what did you learn?

My biggest mistake was trying to make the product complete before properly launching it. Every time Daylytix was close to being ready, I noticed another feature I could add, another workflow I could improve, or another part of the interface that did not feel polished enough. Building became a way of postponing the uncomfortable step of putting the product in front of a wider audience. The problem is that a platform like this can never truly be finished. There will always be another module, integration, report, or improvement worth building. If I had continued working that way, the official launch would have kept moving further away. I should have followed a much simpler principle, build the core product first, release it, learn from real users, and then make it better and prettier. Instead, I tried to solve too many possible problems before knowing which ones mattered most to users. The lesson was that more features do not automatically make a better product. Sometimes they create complexity, delay feedback, and make the interface harder to understand. Now I am much more focused on simplifying what already exists, launching properly, and allowing real usage to guide what gets built next. Progress is not measured by how much code I add. It is measured by whether the product is being used and whether it solves the right problems.

If you could go back to day one, what would you do differently?

I would build less at the beginning. I kept seeing real problems I knew how to solve, so every time I had a new idea, I added another feature or module. That made the product powerful, but it also created complexity much earlier than necessary. If I could start again, I would choose one very clear workflow, make it excellent, and put it in front of users sooner. I would involve a UX professional from the beginning instead of waiting until the interface has already become difficult to simplify. I would also start marketing much earlier. I treated marketing as something that would come after the product was ready, but a SaaS product is never completely finished. Building distribution, talking to potential users, and explaining the product are part of building the product itself. The biggest lesson for me is that more features do not automatically create more value. A smaller product that people immediately understand and use is better than a much larger one that needs to be explained.