Does it matter if your app was purely "vibe coded" for acquisitions?
I've been having a lot of fun exploring AI and using tools like @Cursor, @bolt.new, @Lovable, and @Warp to learn how to build and make some apps for myself! I'm also noticing a tremendous amount of growth in folks creating their own apps using these same tools which has me wondering... if a company wanted to acquire someone's app or tool that was built via vibe coding, would it matter how it was built? Does the method of how it was built impact the valuation?
In my idealistic eyes, I'd like to think it doesn't. As an acquisition is often much more than just the tech but also the user base, brand, and even team behind the product. If anything I think that acquiring a product that has been "vibe coded" and putting them into capable engineering hands would only enhance the product...or a least make the code base cleaner.
I also believe that talent that is able to create stunning products with AI is currently a small percentage of folks, and that companies should be investing in acquiring that talent (either independently or via product acquisition) so that they can stay ahead in innovation while learning how to implement AI tools more efficiently in their orgs.
Very curious to hear what you all think!
Replies
I think maybe right now it has some impact, but AI is improving rapidly, and soon the code it generates will be as good as, if not better than most devs.
And yes, there’s definitely a very small percentage of people who can actually create something production-ready with AI at this moment.
The reason? There’s a learning curve for "vibe coding," and most people get nowhere (not even some AI celebrities).
Right now, it’s very easy to create something simple, but creating something complex is very hard.
I’ve been playing around with AI and creating projects long before any of those tools you mentioned even existed.
I’m also coaching some people live on video, and there’s one person in particular worth mentioning—20 years as a software engineer, and he can’t get anywhere with Cursor when "vibe coding." Funny, no?
But the hype is real and only getting bigger. I posted about my fully AI-coded app on r/microsaas, and in just three days, my post surpassed the most upvotes of all time:
https://www.reddit.com/r/microsaas/s/hdqFF0wsxF
Graphify
Yeah, I don’t think it really matters how it was built as long as it works. Like you said, acquisitions are way more about the user base, brand, and market fit rather than the exact tech stack.
If a product has traction, solves a real problem, and has potential, then a company can always refactor or optimize the code later if needed. In fact, plenty of acquired startups go through a rewrite at some point anyway.
The only place where it might be a factor is if the code is so messy that it’s a nightmare to maintain, but even then, if the product is worth it, that’s just an engineering challenge to solve.
Product Hunt
The code per se is almost never the value in an acquisition. Traction, patents, etc. are where the real value is. However, I can see how anything that's doable with vibes alone will get a lower valuation simply because it would be easier to just make a competing product, if there's no other moat.
@ken_miller4 are there Vibe Lawyers who will file lawsuits written by AI in order to protect your IP from being stolen by LLM ingestion? Asking for a friend.
Product Hunt
@chrismessina I mean, these days the answer is always "yes"
Product Hunt
@gabe +1 on this question. I’d love to hear from Founders who have experienced this firsthand.
It seems we're moving into a world where this matters less and less, and it's more about the idea/problem being solved, design and execution, and whether or not it gains traction. So many products launch on Product Hunt each day, many attempting to solve the same thing - but only a few manage to create the secret sauce to integrate themselves deeply into people's lives and become indispensable. If a product hits that, I don’t think anyone should care that it was built from the ground up by an engineer or by AI.
I have a different take on this. Most acquirers are deciding between buy vs build. The main reasons they choose buy is:
The cost to build is too high or presents too many unknowns (execution, strategic, etc.)
The product they're eyeing has a strategic, fast-growing, and/or otherwise attractive distribution moat
Said another way- the higher the price you get for something is about how much of a reliable moat you have.
Recurring sales x low churn x growth x stable product = higher multiple.
Something being built with Cursor or Windsurf isn't really the important part. It's more about: what moat did you build? If Cursor can one-shot the entire product and you have no sales, there's nothing defensible there. That's why we're already seeing a huge wave of products with no/low sales on @Acquire.com @Flippa etc. that sell for very low prices (think $2-20k).
I think a more interesting and strategic opportunity right now is to not go all-in on vibe coding and instead get really good at one distribution channel (PPC, SEO, social, etc.) then go acquire decently made products for very small prices and scale them using your preferred channel.
Could you share a few products that can be classified as "vibe coded"?
Great question, @gabe !
Vibe coding isn’t a limitation—it’s an accelerator. It lowers the barrier to innovation.
Like most below replies - For acquisitions, factors like user adoption, market fit, and growth potential outweigh whether the code was AI-generated or traditionally written. If the product delivers value, scales well, and has a strong user base, the method of creation is secondary.