Why We Killed Generic Boilerplates (And Built Something Weird Instead)

The $79 lie

Every boilerplate sells the same dream. "Ship your SaaS in 24 hours!" "Everything you need to launch!" "Save weeks of development!". They're not technically lying. You do save time on initial setup. Authentication works. Payments connect. Database is ready. Then you try to build YOUR app.

That's when you realize the authentication is built for B2C but you're building B2B. The payment system assumes subscriptions but you need usage-based billing. The database schema makes sense for a todo app but you're building a CRM. Now you're not saving time. You're performing surgery.

My boilerplate horror story

Let me tell you about my worst retrofitting experience. I was building a developer tool. API-first, needs webhooks, GitHub integration. ShipFast is great, but it's built for typical SaaS apps. User signs up, pays monthly, uses web app. Simple. My thing wasn't simple.

• First problem: ShipFast assumes all users come through the web. My users were using CLI tools and SDKs. The auth system completely broke. I spent a week ripping out NextAuth and building API key authentication.
• Second problem: The billing. ShipFast uses Stripe subscriptions. Clean, simple, works great for monthly SaaS. But I needed usage-based billing. Every API call costs money. Customers prepay credits. None of this fit the ShipFast model.
• Third problem: The dashboard. ShipFast gives you a beautiful user dashboard. Charts, settings, profile management. Useless for my CLI tool users who never see the web interface.

Three weeks in, I'd replaced 60% of the boilerplate. The remaining 40% was fighting me because it expected the parts I removed. My "ship in 24 hours" project took 2 months. The pattern repeats, Talk to any developer who's used boilerplates. Same story, different details.

• John bought SaaSStarter for his B2B analytics tool. Spent three weeks adding multi-tenancy because SaaSStarter assumes single-user accounts.
• Maria used NextBase for her marketplace. Fought for a month to add seller accounts because NextBase only has one user type.
• Raj picked BoilerplateX for his AI app. Realized too late it was built for CRUD apps and couldn't handle real-time streaming.

We all made the same mistake. We thought generic could work.

Why generic fails

Generic boilerplates make thousands of decisions for you. Most are wrong for your specific case.

Take authentication. Seems simple, right? But do you need:

• Social logins or email only?
• Team accounts or individual?
• Role-based permissions or simple access?
• API keys or just web sessions?
• SSO support or basic auth?

A generic boilerplate picks one path. If it's not your path, you're screwed.

Same with payments:

• Subscriptions or one-time?
• Fixed pricing or usage-based?
• Free trials or freemium?
• Team billing or per-user?
• Multiple currencies or USD only?

And databases:

• Relational or document?
• Multi-tenant or single?
• Real-time or standard?
• Audit logs or simple storage?

Every choice compounds. By the time you've retrofitted all the wrong decisions, you might as well have started from scratch.

The BuilderBox experiment

We got tired of retrofitting. So we tried something weird. What if the boilerplate adapted to your project instead of the other way around? Instead of building one perfect boilerplate, we built a system that generates boilerplates. You describe your project. Not just "SaaS app" but the real details. B2B or B2C? What kind of users? How do they pay? What's unique about your thing?

Then we generate code that matches. Not generic code with your name on it. Actual architectural decisions based on your needs. Building a marketplace? You get dual user types, escrow logic, and review systems. Building a dev tool? You get API-first architecture, CLI templates, and webhook infrastructure. Building enterprise SaaS? You get multi-tenancy, audit logs, and SAML auth. No retrofitting. No surgery. Just code that fits.

Real examples beat theory

Let me show you what I mean.

When Tom described his financial analytics platform, he mentioned enterprise customers and compliance needs. His generated boilerplate included:

• SAML authentication (not in any generic boilerplate)
• Audit log infrastructure
• Data retention policies
• Role hierarchies with approval workflows
• When Lisa described her creator platform, she got:
• Stripe Connect integration (not basic Stripe)
• Content ownership models
• DMCA handling structure
• Creator analytics dashboard

Same framework. Completely different outputs. Because their needs were different.

The cost of customization

People ask why BuilderBox costs more than generic boilerplates. Fair question. ShipFast is $79. We're $147. But ShipFast plus 80 hours of retrofitting at $100/hour is $8,079. And that's if everything goes smoothly. We're not really competing with the $79. We're competing with the $8,079.

Who shouldn't use BuilderBox

Let's be honest. BuilderBox isn't for everyone.

• If you're building a standard SaaS with normal features, generic might work. If your needs perfectly match what ShipFast offers, use ShipFast. It's a good product.
• If you enjoy retrofitting code, we're not for you. Some developers like the puzzle. They want to tear apart systems and rebuild them. Cool. Have fun.
• If you're just experimenting, generic is fine. You don't need custom architecture for a weekend project.

But if you're building something real, something specific, something that doesn't fit the mold... then we need to talk.

The future of boilerplates

I think generic boilerplates are dying. Not because they're bad. Because software is getting more specific. Every market has unique needs. Every business model requires different architecture. Every founder has specific requirements.

The future isn't one perfect boilerplate. It's infinite perfect boilerplates, each generated for a specific need. That's what we're building. Not because we're visionaries. Because we got tired of retrofitting.

Your move

You've got three options:

• Start from scratch (6 weeks minimum)
• Buy generic and retrofit (2-4 weeks of pain)
• Generate something that fits (3 hours)

I know which one I'd pick. But I'm biased. I've been through the retrofit hell too many times. What about you? Still convinced that generic boilerplate will work this time? Still ready to spend weeks changing "just a few things"? Or are you ready for code that actually fits?

Because your idea is unique. Your boilerplate should be too.

P.S. That ShipFast project I mentioned? I rebuilt it with BuilderBox in 4 hours. It's serving 10,000 developers now. Sometimes weird ideas work.