Initial hypothesis: Salon owners would pay less (R$29–39/month) for a simple WhatsApp-integrated solution vs competitors (R$80–100/month). Salon owner pain validation (interviews with 5 establishments): Confirmed client loss due to slow response during in-person service, frustration with no-shows, and price discrepancy between apps vs actual salon prices. Resistance to apps/sites due to complexity + mandatory registration at critical moments. WhatsApp validated as natural channel for low tech-touch audience. Client pain validation (interviews with 5 clients + customer review analysis): Confirmed frustration with mandatory registration for simple bookings, unwanted promotional messages from scheduling apps, and poor UX on salon websites. Pattern reinforced across competitor reviews: clients prefer WhatsApp for its familiarity and simplicity. Price validation (fake door + 15 pitches): Early conversations revealed pain with existing solutions was so great that price parity (R$80–100/month) still made sense despite reduced features. Pivoted pricing from cost differentiation to competitive parity. Result: 60% showed real purchase intent, 2/2 trial spots filled. Critical scope decision: Prioritize simplicity and accessibility (concierge activation, 3-step bot, mobile-first calendar) vs advanced features, betting that superior experience on the right channel would compensate for feature gap with competitors.