"An email address tells you someone liked your promise. A person using your app can tell you where that promise breaks." That is a good summary of why the waitlist feels weaker now. The cost of a working first version has dropped so far that collecting interest instead of usage is often the slower way to learn.

I also appreciate that you held both directions to the same standard. Manus succeeding after an invite-only launch does not prove the restriction caused it, and a failed waitlist does not prove it was the problem. The test you end on, does the wait correspond to a real capacity limit or experiment, is the useful one.

At Ascendra Ventures we see founders get the most from a very narrow first build: one workflow, done properly, in front of the people who would otherwise sit on a list. What they learn in two weeks of usage usually reshapes the roadmap more than any signup count.

Have you seen a case where a waitlist still made sense for a software product that could ship a small version quickly?