Multi-tenancy isn't actually isolated
Two paying customers can see each other's data. Not because anyone messed up — because the no-code builder doesn't have a multi-tenant primitive, just shared tables with filters that fail under load.
A focused rescue engagement that audits your no-code build, migrates what's worth keeping, and ships the version that holds when paying customers show up. Same domain. Same users. Real architecture.
Lovable, Bolt, Bubble, and Replit are excellent at one job: getting an idea in front of users fast. They're the right tool for validation. They're not the right tool for production.
Most founders hit this wall around the moment of product-market fit — the same moment that makes the wall worth crossing. Real users start running into the edges. The first enterprise prospect asks for a security questionnaire. Costs that were trivial start scaling linearly. Adding the next feature breaks the previous three.
That moment is what this exists for.
Two paying customers can see each other's data. Not because anyone messed up — because the no-code builder doesn't have a multi-tenant primitive, just shared tables with filters that fail under load.
Email login works. Password reset works on the happy path. But sessions don't survive timezones, OAuth refresh fails silently, and admin-vs-user role boundaries leak in surprising ways.
The codebase is a hairball — patterns generated to look clean per-prompt but with no overall architecture. Every change has unpredictable blast radius.
No audit log. No rate limiting. Secrets in environment files. No structured access control. Your first enterprise prospect runs a security questionnaire and you fail every section.
Your no-code platform charges per row, per workflow run, per user. As traction grows, infrastructure cost grows in lockstep. There's no path to operating leverage.
Even if you 'export to GitHub,' the export is unidiomatic, full of platform-specific glue, and unmaintainable by a normal engineering team.
We don't rip and replace. We migrate what's worth keeping. Data, content, copy, design — preserved. Architecture, auth, security — rebuilt.
We read your codebase end to end. Document the actual behavior — what users do, what works, what's load-bearing. Identify the patterns worth preserving (data shape, copy, designs) and the ones that need rebuilding (auth, multi-tenant, infra, security).
A scoped migration plan: keep, rebuild, retire. What we keep: data, content, copy, design system, brand assets. What we rebuild: architecture, auth, multi-tenant, observability, security posture. What we retire: platform-specific glue and patterns that won't extend.
We rebuild the load-bearing layers on production foundations — same standards as our Tablestakes tier. Real multi-tenant data model. Hardened auth. Production hosting + CI/CD. Monitoring + alerting. Audit log.
Data migration. Content migration. SEO redirects. User communication. We move every paying user onto the new system without losing accounts, billing, or content.
Production deployment. DNS cutover. Smoke tests. Final QA. Old platform sunset. You're now on a codebase your engineering team — or any future engineering team, or any future AI agent — can extend without rewriting.
Maps to our standard Launchpad tiers based on AI features and integration complexity.
Optional Spec Sprint first ($7,500, 7–10 days) — to scope the rescue properly before committing. Credited against the rescue if you proceed within 30 days.
No. The migration plan is built around zero data loss and zero billing disruption. We move accounts, sessions, content, and payment subscriptions cleanly. Users see a brief maintenance window during cutover; nothing else.
Your domain stays. URL structure stays where SEO matters. Where existing URLs are auto-generated by the no-code platform and unfit for SEO, we rebuild with proper URL patterns and add 301 redirects from the old ones.
Yes — and many founders do. Marketing pages, blogs, landing pages are exactly the kind of work no-code tools are good at. We rescue the production app; the marketing site can stay on Lovable, Webflow, Framer, or wherever it lives.
Because what you get is technically your code but not maintainable code. The export is unidiomatic, full of platform-specific patterns, and structured for fast iteration in Lovable's environment — not for extension by a real engineering team. You'd spend weeks refactoring before adding a single feature.
Rescues typically map to our Tablestakes tier (from $25K, 3–4 weeks) or Core tier (from $50K, 5–6 weeks) depending on AI features and integration complexity. The audit phase clarifies which tier fits.
Then a rescue is the right call. PMF is the moment when 'good enough demo' becomes 'production system.' That transition is exactly what we exist for.
Bring your no-code build. Leave with a production system on a real codebase.