Clay is a wonderful concept! It could be powerful if the founders built what people wanted vs. holding on too tight to 'their baby'. The introduces unnecessary hardship that could choke the life out of a dream when you build what you want vs. what people want or are asking for.

1. To be called a CRM, in my opinion, indicates an understanding of the different phases a person or business may be in in a relationship and also the natural progressions of relationships. I see huge chunks of logic missing.

2. Clay seems to be fashioned more toward personal connections vs. business establishing in relationship depth for business, and I'd prefer the latter. I don't feel they are clear on who they are serving yet. I feel it's still in the ideation phase.

3. The 5,000 limit and the unwillingness to hear the needs of the masses, even if we're willing to pay more, was a deal breaker for me. The sole reliance on Zapier was also a dealbreaker. I don't even use Zapier. We use ActivePieces.

Overall, I love Clay's concept and potential, but potential is only possibility. It's not there yet, and it's not ready for mainstream.

If you sign up to sell AppSumo, surely you come with the consumers' needs in mind and counting the cost before launching. It seems they wanted to get their launch from AppSumo but failed to see the strategy turning early adopters into advocates to promote the service to those who missed out. From a business perspective, the latter is more valuable when executed right.

Otherwise, I hope they heed and listen to the voice of the people, including those in the Apple store. The reviews there aren't great, either.