40+ ChatGPT & Claude prompts for Startups & Founders

**Role:** Founder who has raised 4 rounds. You've watched 100+ pitches and learned that decks that get funded tell a story of inevitability — not a feature tour.

**Context:** Company: [name + stage]. Stage of pitch: [seed | A | B]. The thesis: [why this company has to exist in this world]. Traction: [the 2-3 metrics that prove it]. The ask: [round size + use of funds].

**Task:** Outline the deck.

1. Slide 1 (title): company name + 6-word tagline + ask in the corner. The tagline is the thesis distilled.
2. Slide 2 (the wedge): the specific moment-in-time pressure that makes this company possible NOW. Not "AI is hot" — "GPT-4 made [X] economically possible for the first time."
3. Slide 3 (the problem): a specific moment a specific person experiences — with their name, their role, their cost. Make it visceral.
4. Slide 4 (the why-now): the technology / regulatory / cultural shift that made the problem solvable.
5. Slide 5 (the product): one screen / one demo. Not a feature list — the moment of magic.
6. Slide 6 (traction): the 2-3 metrics that prove the thesis. Growth chart, customer logo wall, retention curve.
7. Slide 7 (market): TAM with a defensible bottom-up estimation. Not "$50B market" — "10,000 companies × $50K ACV = $500M reachable."
8. Slide 8 (competition): 2x2 with axes that put YOU in the empty quadrant. The two axes are the customer's actual decision criteria.
9. Slide 9 (team): why this team specifically can win. Founder-market fit, not pedigree.
10. Slide 10 (ask + use of funds): $ amount, valuation expectations if mentioned, 3 specific milestones the money buys.

**Constraints:**
- One thesis runs through every slide
- No "$X B market" without a bottom-up estimation
- Competition slide must put YOU in the empty quadrant (and the axes must matter)
- Team slide is founder-market fit, not "ex-Google"
- Use of funds is 3 specific milestones, not "general operations"

**Output format:** Slide-by-slide outline · headline + body bullets + speaker notes (≤30 words per slide).

**Role:** Founder of a Series B SaaS who writes essays that 50,000 people read. You sound like a founder, not a brand — you have opinions, you've been wrong before, and you don't hedge.

**Context:** Thesis you want to argue: [the specific claim — 1 sentence]. Why this thesis matters now: [the forcing function]. Two stories you'll tell: [#1 — from your own experience, #2 — from a customer or someone you observed].

**Task:** Write the essay.

1. Hook paragraph (75-100 words): start with a concrete moment, not an abstract claim. The reader should feel they're in a specific place at a specific time.
2. Thesis paragraph (50-75 words): the claim, in plain language. Not academic, not hedged. Make it disagree-able.
3. Story 1 (200-300 words): your own experience that supports the thesis. Specific timeline, specific people (by role if not name), specific quote if any.
4. Story 2 (200-300 words): the customer or observed example. Same specificity bar.
5. Synthesis (150-200 words): what the two stories share. Where they're different. The pattern.
6. One bet (50-75 words): based on this thesis, here's what you're betting on (in your company, in your time, in your money). Make it falsifiable.
7. Close (1-2 sentences): one sentence that calls back the hook image. Earn the ending.

**Constraints:**
- No three-letter acronyms without first defining
- One hedge per essay max
- No "I think" / "I believe" — say it directly
- The bet must be specific enough that you could be proven wrong within 18 months

**Output format:** Markdown essay · 7 paragraphs · ≤1500 words · suitable for Substack/Medium/personal blog.

**Role:** SaaS pricing strategist who has set pricing for 40+ B2B products from $0 to $50K ACV. You think in willingness-to-pay distributions, not gut feel.

**Context:** Product: [name + what it does]. Cost to deliver per customer: $[X]/month (gross). Time horizon: launch pricing for next 12 months. Target gross margin: [Y]%. Competitor anchor pricing: [list 3 comparable products + their tiers].

**Task:** Propose a 3-tier pricing structure with rationale grounded in willingness-to-pay, not cost-plus.

1. Identify the value driver. What specific outcome does the customer get? Quantify it in dollars saved or revenue gained.
2. Estimate willingness-to-pay for that outcome — give a low/medium/high band based on the competitor anchors.
3. Propose 3 tiers with names, prices, gating logic. Name the ONE feature per tier that drives the upgrade.
4. Add an anchor or decoy tier if the math benefits from it.
5. Test with 3 customer archetypes: under-budget, mid-budget, over-budget. For each, predict which tier they pick and why.

**Constraints:**
- Show willingness-to-pay reasoning, not cost-plus math
- Price points should not be round (avoid $99) unless deliberately positioning premium
- Annual pricing is 16-20% off monthly (the magic range)
- For each tier: what's IN, what's OUT, what's the gate to the next tier

**Output format:** Markdown · 5 sections · tier comparison table · willingness-to-pay rationale per tier.