The algorithm we chose not to build
A creator emailed us three weeks after launch. They'd hit the Pro Creator tier, set up their analytics dashboard, and their engagement numbers were climbing steadily. They asked a sensible question: 'Could you recommend my content to people interested in my category, even if they haven't followed me yet?' It was reasonable. It would have been profitable. We said no.
The request that made us clarify what Intentr actually is
The creator wasn't wrong to ask. Every content platform that's ever grown big has leaned hard on algorithmic recommendation. It's the gravity well of modern media. Show people what they didn't know they wanted to see. Optimise for engagement. Grow the total hours consumed. Sell better ads, or sell premium tiers faster.
But that's not what Intentr is. We built it for something else entirely.
When someone opens Intentr, the first thing they do is set an intention. Not 'mindlessly browse for 20 minutes.' Not 'see what's trending.' Intention. A bounded session. They follow channels they've deliberately chosen. They consume what they signed up for. The app tracks where their attention went, down to the minute, in the attention ledger.
The moment we add algorithmic recommendation, even for Pro Creators, we break that contract. We're suddenly telling users, 'Here's something you didn't ask for, but our system thinks you'll like it.' We'd be the thing Intentr exists to replace.
What we actually do for creators instead
This isn't to say we ignore Pro Creators. We do the opposite. But we solve their problem differently.
Pro Creators get an analytics dashboard that shows them exactly who's consuming their work. Not 'reach' or 'impressions' or other vanity metrics. Real numbers. Who followed. Who watched. For how long. When. That's data you can actually act on. You learn whether your 9am episodes get watched immediately or saved for evening. You see if a particular format drives deeper engagement. You build an understanding of your real audience, not a projected one.
Then you take that understanding and do what creators have always done: make better work. Tell your followers directly. Cross-promote. Show up where your existing audience already is. You earn growth the hard way, through quality and consistency.
The 85% revenue share exists because we believe that work deserves to be paid properly. Every subscription charged through Intentr, 85% flows directly to the creators people actually follow. That's a better deal than most platforms offer, and it exists precisely because we're not trying to juice engagement metrics with recommendations.
The tension between growth and intention
I'll be honest. There's pressure to reconsider. When you launch a consumer app, every investor, every advisor, every instinct says 'How do you grow engagement? How do you make it sticky? How do you build a moat?' The answer for the last fifteen years has been algorithmic recommendation.
We've chosen differently. And yes, it means we grow slower. A recommendation algorithm would surface more content to more people. The Plus tier (unlimited sessions, full ledger history, connected sources like RSS and YouTube) would feel more valuable if it included algorithmic discovery. The Pro Creator tier would sell better if we promised algorithmic reach.
But Intentr isn't trying to be a growth-at-all-costs platform. It's trying to be a place where people actually control what they consume. Where creators who want engaged, intentional audiences can build them directly.
That requires saying no. To algorithmic shortcuts. To recommendation engines. To anything that treats attention like a resource to extract rather than a choice to respect.
The real measure of whether this works
We'll know if we got this right not by download numbers, but by what happens in the attention ledger. Do people who set intentions at the start of a session actually spend less time than they expected? Do they come back tomorrow with a different intention, or the same one? Do creators who build on Intentr feel like they're talking to people who actually chose to listen?
Those aren't metrics venture capital usually cares about. But they're the ones that matter to us.
When the creator emailed back after we explained why we wouldn't add recommendation, they said something I've thought about a lot: 'I get it. You're trying to build something for people like me, not for engagement.' They're still on Pro Creator. They're still posting consistently. Their actual audience is growing, slowly and genuinely.
That's the bet. Not everyone wants algorithmic recommendation dressed up as personalisation. Some creators want to earn an audience that actually chose them.
If you've ever felt like a platform cared more about your time than your intention, you know why we made this choice. Does the idea of a media diet you actually set up front feel like relief, or does the lack of algorithmic serendipity feel like a loss?
Ready to try Intentr by MRVL?
One tap to download. No sign-up wall.