Founder / Product manager / 0 → 1 case study

From strangers
to familiar faces.

How I designed Circles around a different question: not how to help people discover more events, but how to help them build real relationships in a city full of possibilities.

Product strategyAI-assisted building with LovableMatching systemsReal-world validation

Explore the case study ↓ View live Circles ↗

Public portfolio · Sensitive matching IP excluded · Evidence labels distinguish observed features from founder-reported work and proposals

01 / The opportunity

Discovery is abundant.
Belonging is scarce.

Circles is positioned as a living map of people, communities and plans already overlapping around you. The goal is to turn one-off interactions into familiar faces and repeat connection.

User problem

“Who do I go with?”

Even in a city full of activities, the effort of finding company, coordinating and showing up can stop a plan before it starts.

Product hypothesis

Plans as a social bridge

Shared context and concrete activities may make introductions feel warmer and lower the barrier to meeting offline.

North star candidate

Repeat connection

Measure whether people reconnect, not just whether they browse, match, or attend once. Proposed metric; not a reported result.

“Not another feed. Not another group chat. Not another event app.”

Positioning adapted from the public Circles homepage.

02 / Experience design

Four acts, one relationship loop.

These four steps are described on the public Circles website. The design rationale below is my product interpretation; the public page does not establish funnel performance.

01 / PROFILE

Express your world

Neighborhood, interests and communities give people context beyond a static bio.

02 / OVERLAP

Find warm signals

Shared interests, friends, communities and plans create a more natural starting point.

03 / PLANS

Make it concrete

Curated nearby plans move users from abstract intent to something they can attend.

04 / CIRCLE

See each other again

The goal is repeated familiarity, not an endless supply of new introductions.

Illustrative people connected by overlapping circlesDesigned around belonging, not endless swiping.
Product tradeoffs

What we optimize for

Relevance over volume. A small set of credible plans instead of overwhelming choice.

Context over cold starts. Social overlap gives people a reason to connect.

Offline outcomes over screen time. The desired behavior happens outside the app.

These are positioning and design principles, not claims of measured lift.

03 / Technical judgment

Matching is a product decision, not a magic score.

Circles' founder reports using structured matching signals and replacing unreliable LLM-written match explanations with deterministic templates. This portfolio intentionally omits the production weights, scoring function, thresholds and group-formation algorithm.

Conceptual architecture · not production implementation
Consent-based profile & plan signals
→
Eligibility & safety checks
→
Compatibility evaluation
→
Group-level review
→
Grounded explanation

Illustrative logical stages only. No claim is made that these are the exact live services, sequence, or safeguards.

Interactive demo · synthetic inputs

Explore the matching tradeoffs

Move the sliders to see how different signals can affect a simple public-safe suitability illustration. Equal weighting is used solely for this demo.

65/100

Explore group fit

Not a production score or prediction. Real matching requires consent, safety, context, group composition and evaluation beyond this toy example.

Decision memo

Why we reduced LLM-generated explanations

Observed problem (founder-reported): Generated matching copy sometimes asserted shared traits unsupported by source data.

Decision: Use deterministic, data-grounded explanation templates rather than free-form generated claims.

Tradeoff: Less expressive language, but stronger factual control, inspectability and user trust.

How I'd evaluate it: Unsupported-claim rate, user comprehension, complaint rate, match acceptance and downstream attendance.

What this demonstrates
AI judgment means knowing when not to use generative AI.
Building with Lovable · founder-reported

From product idea to working application

I built Circles using Lovable, applying AI-assisted development to iterate on product experiences and workflows. This demonstrates hands-on prototyping and an ability to connect UX requirements with implementation. The public website alone does not verify the full production stack, security controls, integrations or app-level adoption; those details are deliberately not claimed here.

04 / Commercial judgment

A relationship product with an offline proof point.

Early paid-event validation supports a narrow conclusion: people were willing to pay for a curated social experience. It does not establish app retention, repeat engagement or scalable unit economics.

89

Applications

Reported interest in the Delhi curated event pilot.

Founder-reported
25

Paying guests

Reported participants in the same pilot.

Founder-reported
28%

Guests / applications

Descriptive ratio only; not a conversion rate for an open self-serve funnel.

Calculated

Positioning against alternatives

ApproachPrimary job to be doneCircles' intended differentiation
Event discovery platformsFind something to attendSurface the people and communities around the plan
Friend discovery appsMeet potential friendsAnchor introductions in shared real-world activity
Curated social experiencesAttend a facilitated gatheringBuild continuity beyond a single experience

Qualitative positioning framework, not an independently validated competitor feature audit.

Potential business model · hypothesis

Start with high-intent experiences

Curated gatherings can test willingness to pay and the operational requirements for quality. Possible longer-term models include ticketing or venue partnerships, but these are not presented as proven recurring revenue streams.

Marketplace challenge

Density before breadth

A neighborhood-first launch can help concentrate plans and community overlap. The tradeoff is slower geographic expansion in exchange for a stronger chance of repeat interaction.

05 / Next product bets

What I'd test next.

These are proposed experiments, not shipped features or achieved outcomes.

Experiment A

Measure the second encounter

Instrument opt-in post-event feedback and repeat co-attendance. Test whether continuity prompts improve meaningful reconnection without feeling intrusive.

Primary metric: repeat meaningful connection within 30 days.

Experiment B

Improve first-plan activation

Compare a focused set of context-rich plans with a broader browse experience, while holding neighborhood supply constant.

Primary metric: qualified plan attendance per activated user.

Experiment C

Earn trust in matching

Test whether clear, grounded explanations improve users' confidence and attendance relative to opaque recommendations.

Guardrail: misleading-explanation reports and opt-outs.

Product philosophy

Start with a real behavior, not a fashionable technology. Make the tradeoffs explicit. Ship the smallest credible experience. Measure what happens in the world.

Circles / Product case study

Build for the moment
people actually meet.

Created as a hiring portfolio case study. No proprietary matching weights or source code disclosed.

Visit Circles ↗ · Back to top ↑

Evidence key: public product positioning reviewed at circlesnyc.com on October 13, 2026; founder-reported decisions and Delhi pilot figures; explicitly labeled conceptual demonstrations and proposals. App authentication, production architecture, and analytics were not independently audited.