Why I Built 6 'Agento' Products Instead of 1 Big Platform
The startup playbook says focus. I built six vertical AI products in parallel. Here's why vertical beats horizontal, why separate brands beat a unified platform, and when breaking the rules is the right strategy.
When I tell people I'm building six AI products at the same time, the first question is always: "Why not build one platform that does everything?"
It's a fair question. The technology is shared. The infrastructure is shared. The team is shared. From an engineering perspective, a single platform would be simpler. One codebase, one deployment pipeline, one support channel.
But products aren't engineering decisions. They're market decisions. And from a market perspective, six vertical products beat one horizontal platform every time.
The Horizontal Trap
A horizontal platform tries to serve everyone. "AI for everything." "The all-in-one solution." "One tool to rule them all."
These pitches sound compelling to investors and engineers. They sound meaningless to customers.
When a solo attorney needs help preparing a demand letter, they don't search for "AI platform." They search for "legal AI tool" or "demand letter generator." When a travel agent needs to build an itinerary, they don't search for "multi-purpose AI." They search for "AI trip planner."
Horizontal platforms have a discovery problem. Nobody wakes up and thinks "I need a horizontal AI platform." People wake up and think "I need a better way to plan trips" or "I need a cheaper way to get legal help."
Vertical products match how people search, how they evaluate, and how they buy. Each Agento product has a name, a domain, a landing page, and a value proposition that speaks directly to one audience. LegalAgento speaks to people with legal problems. TravelAgento speaks to travelers. CodeAgento speaks to developers.
A horizontal platform that combined all of these would speak to no one.
The Positioning Advantage
Each Agento product can claim a category position that a unified platform never could.
LegalAgento is "the first AI-powered unbundled legal services marketplace." That's a specific, defensible, memorable position. Press covers it. Users remember it. Competitors have to respond to it.
If LegalAgento were a feature inside "Agento Platform," the positioning would be "the AI platform that, among other things, also does legal stuff." Nobody covers that. Nobody remembers it. Nobody feels like it's built for them.
Positioning is about sacrifice. You have to give up being everything to be something specific. Six products means six specific positions, each powerful in its own market. One platform means one generic position, weak in every market.
When a Customer Needs Something Specific
Imagine you're a solo attorney evaluating AI tools for your practice. You find two options:
Option A: LegalAgento, built specifically for legal professionals, understands bar rules, handles trust account compliance, matches clients with attorneys by practice area and jurisdiction.
Option B: Agento Platform, an AI tool that does legal, travel, healthcare, coding, advertising, and startup planning. Legal is one of six features.
Which do you trust with your clients' legal matters?
The answer is obvious. Professionals trust tools that are built for their profession. A legal tool that also does travel feels like it doesn't take legal seriously. A travel tool that also does legal feels like a toy.
Separate products create separate trust. Each product builds credibility within its vertical without being diluted by unrelated capabilities.
The Naming Strategy
Every Agento product follows a naming convention: [Domain]Agento. Legal + Agento = LegalAgento. Travel + Agento = TravelAgento. Code + Agento = CodeAgento.
This is deliberate. The naming convention does three things:
Instant comprehension. You know what TravelAgento does before visiting the site. The name contains both the domain and the brand. Zero explanation needed.
Family recognition. Users who know LegalAgento and discover TravelAgento immediately understand they're from the same family. The shared "Agento" suffix signals shared quality and shared philosophy.
SEO advantage. Each product name contains its primary keyword. LegalAgento ranks for "legal agent" searches. TravelAgento ranks for "travel agent" searches. A unified "Agento Platform" would rank for nothing specific.
The naming convention is a product strategy disguised as a branding decision.
The Shared Infrastructure Benefit
The business case for vertical products is clear. But vertical products have an engineering cost: you're maintaining six products instead of one.
This is where the shared infrastructure makes the strategy viable. The Agento products share:
- Authentication and user management
- Payment processing and billing
- AI orchestration engine
- Document generation pipeline
- Notification system
- Admin and analytics framework
Each product adds its domain layer on top of the shared infrastructure. The domain layer is the 40% that makes each product unique: the legal matching algorithm, the travel API integrations, the medical scheduling system.
Without shared infrastructure, six products would require six engineering teams. With it, one engineer can build and maintain the core while specialists (or the same engineer with domain knowledge) handle the vertical-specific logic.
The Portfolio Effect
Six products create a portfolio effect that one product can't.
Revenue diversification. If one vertical slows down, the others continue. Legal tech has different market cycles than travel. Healthcare has different adoption patterns than developer tools. Portfolio diversification isn't just a finance concept. It applies to product businesses too.
Cross-pollination. Insights from one vertical inform the others. Building compliance features for LegalAgento improved how I think about compliance in MedAgento. Building recommendation algorithms for TravelAgento influenced how I build matching in LegalAgento.
Talent attraction. Some engineers want to work on legal AI. Some want to work on travel. Some want to work on developer tools. A portfolio of products attracts a wider range of talent than a single product.
Acquisition optionality. If a legal tech company wants to acquire an AI-powered legal marketplace, LegalAgento is a clean acquisition target. If it were a feature inside a larger platform, the acquisition would be a mess of dependencies and shared code.
When Not to Do This
This strategy isn't universally applicable. It works under specific conditions:
You need deep domain knowledge in each vertical. I can build for legal, travel, healthcare, and aviation because I've spent years understanding these industries. Building a vertical product without domain expertise produces a generic product with a specific name. Users see through it immediately.
You need enough shared infrastructure to justify the approach. If each product is truly independent (different tech stack, different architecture, different hosting) you're not building a portfolio. You're just running six separate startups. The efficiency comes from the shared layer.
You need patience. Six products means slower progress on each one. If your market requires first-mover speed in a single vertical, focus beats breadth. I can afford patience because my verticals don't have winner-take-all dynamics.
You need to resist the "platform creep." The temptation to connect the products ("what if LegalAgento users could also plan their travel?") is constant. Resist it. The value of separate products comes from their independence. Cross-selling is fine. Feature merging is not.
The Long View
The Agento suite is a bet on a simple thesis: every industry will need its own AI-native tools, and the company that builds the best tools for each industry (with shared infrastructure underneath) will outperform the company that builds one generic tool for all industries.
It's the same thesis that worked for Salesforce (CRM for sales), HubSpot (CRM for marketing), and Veeva (CRM for pharma). Same underlying technology. Different vertical products. Different brands. Different trust relationships.
The difference is that AI infrastructure, unlike CRM infrastructure, is improving so rapidly that the shared layer gets dramatically better every year. A model upgrade that improves the AI engine benefits all six products overnight. That's a compounding advantage that accelerates over time.
Six products today. More verticals tomorrow. Each one the best in its category. All running on shared intelligence that improves with every product added.
Enjoyed this article?
I write about building products, AI, aviation, and the journey of entrepreneurship. Follow along for more.
Keep reading
Surfyx: What Building a Surf App Taught Me About Distribution
Surfyx is a surf tracking app and social network. Building it taught me that distribution, not features, determines whether a product succeeds in a niche market.
How I Use AI to Run a One-Person Product Studio
I maintain ~20 products solo. AI is not replacing my work, it is multiplying it. Here is how I use Claude and AI tooling to operate at impossible scale.
Building Software for Lawyers: UX Lessons from a Non-Lawyer
What I learned about designing legal software as someone who has never practiced law, and why outsider perspective might actually be an advantage.