The Promise of Universal Appeal
“Built for everyone” sounds generous.
It suggests accessibility, inclusivity, scale. It implies that no one is left out and nothing is taken away.
In practice, mass-market positioning almost always means the opposite.
When an app tries to serve everyone, it has to flatten differences, remove friction selectively, and prioritize the lowest common denominator. What looks like inclusivity on the surface often becomes dilution underneath — the same pattern we warned about when talking about who our product is not for.
Scale Changes Incentives
The moment an app defines success as maximum reach, its incentives shift.
Users stop being individuals with specific needs and start becoming segments, metrics, and growth curves. Decisions are no longer made around “is this good for the user?” but around “will this reduce adoption?” or “could this slow growth?” — a shift we explored in why we don’t chase growth at any cost.
At scale, inconvenience to a minority is easier to justify than resistance from the majority.
That’s where compromise begins.
Simplicity Isn’t Neutral
Mass-market apps often defend their choices with simplicity.
Fewer options.
Fewer decisions.
Fewer visible constraints.
But simplicity at scale is rarely neutral. It usually means removing control from users and replacing it with defaults chosen for growth, retention, or monetization.
What’s framed as ease of use is often a quiet transfer of power.
One Interface, Many Trade-Offs
A single interface meant to work for millions of people has to hide complexity somewhere.
Sometimes it’s hidden from advanced users, who lose flexibility.
Sometimes it’s hidden from new users, who are guided into narrow paths without realizing alternatives exist.
Either way, the app optimizes for consistency over agency.
Consistency is easier to scale.
Agency is harder to manage.
Monetization Always Wins
At mass scale, monetization pressures become unavoidable.
Data collection expands.
Dark patterns appear gradually.
Product decisions begin to favor engagement over clarity.
These changes rarely arrive all at once. They accumulate slowly, justified as necessary trade-offs for “keeping the product free” or “serving a larger audience.”
Users don’t lose autonomy in a single update.
They lose it incrementally — and over time, that makes trust a casualty, just like when users gradually walk away from products they no longer feel they can depend on, as we’ve discussed in why users abandon products they don’t trust.
The Cost of Being “For Everyone”
The real cost of mass-market apps isn’t paid upfront.
It’s paid over time, as trust erodes and expectations drift. Users adapt, tolerate, and adjust — until the product no longer feels like it’s working for them, but on them.
At that point, leaving feels harder than staying, even when dissatisfaction is obvious.
That friction is not accidental.
It’s a feature of scale.
Who Benefits From Compromise
Mass-market apps don’t compromise users because teams are careless.
They do it because compromise is the only way to maintain universal appeal.
When a product refuses to draw boundaries, boundaries are drawn by growth metrics, advertisers, and platform constraints instead.
Users inherit the result.
Choosing Limits Over Scale
There’s an alternative, but it requires accepting limits.
Serving a smaller audience well instead of a massive audience vaguely. Designing with clear assumptions instead of endless flexibility. Saying no early, rather than disappointing later.
This isn’t about elitism.
It’s about honesty.
A product that isn’t for everyone doesn’t have to compromise as much — because it knows who it’s accountable to.