Lumibuild Studio got acquired by Klay Studio last month. (LA based growth agency). I've been sitting with that for a few days now. not because it was a surprise, honestly, when the offer came in, we were still heads down, actively delivering for clients. but Zach as the Founder and me as CEO never had plans to make this THE thing. we both had bigger, separate things we were moving toward. so when the offer arrived, it just felt like the right moment to close it neatly. no drama, just good timing. just over a year of building together, we managed to help 40+ SaaS, Agency, B2B founders with web design, dev and branding solutions. and looking back, I realize that the work was real. - TVG closed 5-6 figure contracts after the redesign. - PinPoint raised a $2.5M round, and we were part of what made that moment possible. - AskCatGPT, Joshua Graham, Jamie Robbins…. and a lot of other founders too. sales came in, conversion rates went up, and real business outcomes were felt after launch. the kind of results that make you feel like what you were doing actually mattered. Zach had the client relationships and trusted my creative direction & management outputs completely. that combo - full trust, clear lanes, and no politics is something I didn't fully appreciate while it was happening. I really do now. grateful for Zach. grateful for every client who trusted us with something that actually mattered to them. this one ended the right way, and honestly, I'm glad it happened.

AI agents might be the best thing to happen to website templates. people keep talking about AI and templates like you have to choose one. but who's saying you can't use AI with a template? you can spend hours prompting an AI builder, figuring out the design direction and trying to get everything to look the way you imagined... OR you can start with a website you've already explored and decided you actually want for your business. now AI has a different job: instead of figuring out what to build, it can help you make what you've chosen yours. this is what I'm particularly interested in with @framer AI Agent: with a design system, skills and a dedicated prompt library we've built for each ZapuskHQ template, the agent has context to help customize existing pages and extend the website using core instructions. choosing a template no longer has to mean choosing something you’ll spend days figuring out how to edit yourself. and that's where the underlying opportunity comes in: a template becoming the best starting point for the customer inside an AI agent workflow. a high-quality foundation from the start, with guidance for making it yours, one that could save you time and tokens compared with generating from a blank page.

quiet days are over, back to work. sharing progress here as it comes together.

ZapuskHQ is live: The Launch-Ready Website System for Online Coaches. It brings what I learned building 60+ websites for clients into a clear path to launch, with the foundations already in place. I’m looking for 15 online coaches to test it for free and share honest feedback. You’ll get full access to: • Website Template (pick between the 2) • The Copywriting Blueprint • Dedicated Slack Channel for Support • Template Customization Guide • Pre-Launch Checklist If you’re an online coach with an offer ready and time to work on your website this week, reply BETA.

40+ projects across a year of agency work teaches you things you can't learn any other way. but the sharpest one came from working with creators and coaches who were right at the edge of launching. Jamie Robbins, Nana Del Rey, AskCatGPT, none of them came to us lost or confused. they had the vision, the branding, the creative direction fully formed. in some cases, more clarity than founders I'd worked with who had entire teams behind them. and still, every single one of them hit the same wall. some of them had already tried AI website builders. but they knew it was just the bones. a starting point. and even with a solid prototype in hand, as they kept telling me: “something was still missing." for me though, it was quite clear: the bones existed. the muscles didn't. what I mean is that building a website and building something that actually sells are two completely different things. one is assembly. the other requires a very specific stack of skills that most creators & coaches never had a reason to develop. think of it like trying to build a Lego Death Star without the instruction book: all the pieces are right there in front of you, and the vision seems to be clear. but without knowing exactly which block goes where and why, you're just staring at a pile of potential. that instruction book is what was always missing. not the creativity. not the offer. not the audience. just the one thing that knows how to take everything you already have and assemble it into a 24/7 sales system that works while you're not online. I watched that pattern repeat enough times that I stopped being surprised by it. now I can't ignore it anymore.

• mediocrity isn't an option.

We just wrapped 4 website projects—2 startups, 1 agency, 1 B2B business. Quality stayed consistent because we didn't change our communication system: proactive updates, structured revisions, documented decisions. The system works regardless of who the client is.

big moves. big changes. 2026 is gonna be lit.

3D motion shots from a current client project. introducing our new service to all of our clients in 2026.

If an agency says "most of our clients are bigger, but we'd love to help you grow", that's not generosity. That's a warning. Here's what actually happens when you're someone's smallest client: Your updates get pushed back. Responses slow down. Junior designers suddenly appear on your project. The PM who signed you disappears. Four months in, they'll tell you: "We can't finish unless you sign a retainer." By then, everything's 80% done, but nothing's usable. Switching vendors means starting over. They know it. You know it. So you sign. It's not evil. It's resource allocation. Most agencies optimize for their ideal client size. When you're below it, you're the filler work between retainer commitments. At Lumibuild Studio, we only work with agencies and SaaS startups doing $10K-100K/month. That's our sweet spot. We don't take enterprise clients with $40K/month budgets because it would force us to deprioritize you. When you're in our designed-for range, you get our best resources, fastest timelines, tightest communication. No bigger fish to bump you.

We analyzed the last 30 web projects we've done. The ones needing 5+ revision rounds had one thing in common: we skipped our "internal filter" before moving to development. Now we run every design through it before executing. Takes 5 minutes to answer, and eliminates 80% of revisions. Here are the questions: 1. Does this solve the actual problem, or just look good? Easy to create something beautiful that accomplishes nothing. We ask: what job does this design need to do? Does it actually do that job? If it's optimized for aesthetics over outcomes, we start over. 2. Is the most important thing obviously the most important? If a visitor can't tell what matters most in 3 seconds, the hierarchy failed. We look at the layout: what do we want them to see first? Does that actually stand out? If not, we fix it before moving forward. 3. Would this make sense to someone seeing it for the first time? We've been staring at this for hours. We know the context, the strategy, the backstory. Clients and their visitors don't. If someone landed here with zero context, would they immediately understand what this is and why it matters? If we have to explain it, it's not clear enough yet. 4. Are we following the strategy, or did we drift? Easy to chase a design direction that looks interesting and forget what we're solving for. Quick check: does this align with the brief? The goals? The audience we're trying to reach? If we've wandered into something that's cool but off-strategy, we pull back. 5. What would we change if we had one more day? There's always something we know could be better. Sometimes it's minor—tighten spacing, refine a headline. Sometimes it's structural—the flow doesn't quite work. If there's something we'd fix with more time, we fix it in design, not after development. The result: Projects now typically need 1-2 revision rounds instead of 4-5. That's 10-15 hours saved per project. Clients can focus feedback on strategic direction instead of catching basic execution problems we should've spotted ourselves. Not perfectionism. Just catching our own issues before they become someone else's feedback. What would you add to this filter?

We're currently building a website for a SaaS startup with over 12,000 customers. Early in the project, we shared wireframes, rough structure and messaging direction. Nothing polished yet. It's the same approach we followed for months: "Don't wait until something's polished to show." Early on, we used to think that it's more professional to present finished work, something that looked complete, refined, ready. But that approach creates problems. When you wait until work is polished to share it, feedback comes late. And late feedback is expensive. Not just in time, but in the decisions that get locked in while you're perfecting something that might be going in the wrong direction. Here's what we've learned after working with 30+ startup and agency founders: Rough work gets better feedback. When something's polished, clients hesitate to give real feedback. It looks done. They don't want to ask you to redo it. So they say it looks good, even if something feels off. When something's rough, feedback is honest and it's clearly a draft. Clients feel comfortable saying "this doesn't feel right" or "I think we're solving the wrong problem." That honesty is what you need early, not politeness. It also catches misalignment faster. If we spend two weeks perfecting a design, then show it, and the client says "actually, I was thinking something completely different"—we've wasted two weeks. If we show rough concepts after three days and hear "that's not the direction," we've saved ourselves weeks of work. Early feedback isn't a disruption. It's a correction before the cost compounds. Here's what rough work looks like: - Wireframes before high-fidelity designs. - Messaging drafts before final copy. - Concept sketches before full layouts. It's not pretty, but it's clear enough to evaluate direction. And direction is what matters most early on, not polish. This doesn't mean we show half-baked nonsense. Rough work is still intentional. It shows our thinking. It has structure. But it's not final and that's the point. When we share it, we're saying: "Here's where we're headed. Does this feel right, or should we adjust before we build it out?" That question, asked early, saves everyone time, money, and frustration. Because catching a problem at the concept stage takes hours to fix. Catching it after everything's polished takes weeks.

Just closed a deal with a multiple 5-figure agency owner (460K+ followers across social medias). He came through a referral. Never asked for my portfolio. Never asked to see case studies. He just wanted to start immediately. No portfolio or pitch I could create matches what happens when a client tells someone in their network: "You need to work with them." I could spend weeks crafting the perfect case study, designing the perfect portfolio, writing the perfect cold email. Or a client who's happy with the results can say one sentence and that carries more weight than anything I'd say about myself.

Most agency partnerships fall apart after the first project. Three months in with our current web dev partner, here's why this one's different: - We don't let assumptions build up. If capacity is tight, we say it. If a timeline doesn't work, we adjust. If something feels off, we talk about it. That honesty prevents the slow resentment that kills partnerships, where small frustrations compound into big problems nobody wants to address. - We show up for more than just the projects. We check in between active work. Share opportunities. Help each other think through challenges even when there's no immediate benefit. That's what helped us sustain this partnership beyond the first project. Not contracts. Not volume. Just two sides genuinely invested in each other's success.