Why? IMHO, and from on-boarding a bunch of folks for my startup, it's because it makes teaching you the software easier and more personal. If you aren't comfortable doing it, that's fine; but I believe it's designed to make the on-boarding of folks better.

Because anyone who becomes an SH customer will be giving them access to their gmail account anyway. AFAICT it is a third party enhancement to one proprietary service (gmail) and SAAS, not a general mail program.

Rahul has written volumes on the SH onboarding process. They train you to use the product so you will actually use it.

I told the lady that I have over 35 years of software development experience and I've used all kinds of software and I don't need guidance and I do, I will reach out to them, but she was stubborn and lost a customer. I tweeted to Rahul and the team, but got no response so far! Well... This is not a scalable business model. But the lady was clear: "Superhuman is not for everybody!" Alrighty then!

You don't need a screenshare to accomplish this. I'm amazed by how much people buy into a companies bullshit and then defend it online.

I literally bought it into, both as a customer and investor. :-)

And did you update your email signature in the way the OP suggested? Specifically, do you let everyone getting email from you know that you not only track that read it, but when they read it, and even where they were when reading it?

I ask, because that would be the ethical way to handle what this app is doing for you.

You should have disclosed that you were an investor in the first comment you made.

Literally, every glowing review I have seen comes from a related party, whether it is an investor, employee, or friend of the CEO.

Well, valuations change. Sell!

That's extremely high for an email client that only runs on a single OS, but if that's true, that's 450k/month or 5.4M/year. How do you get to 260M valuation?

When you say it's "perfectly scalable", what are you using as your reference? That is, what other SaaS has $30/month pricing, especially one in a field as crowded as email and work messaging (i.e. Slack). Obviously, SH is far from having, or needing to have, a finished business plan, and it seems likely that the $30/user won't be the default offering or main breadwinner. But that raises the question of why that number is relevant in the first place when assessing SH's viability.

Well, I pay $5/mo for SaneBox as I always forget to unsubscribe and delete it's pathetic labels. Many of us pay for useless stuff. But some point, we stop, and then the company tanks.

But anyone can do that without screensharing the person's own screen. It's called good old fashioned coaching and teaching.