Why Generic "We Can Do Anything" Positioning Is Killing Your Agency (And How Strong Opinions Build Your Business)

Imagine you're shopping for a technical partner to build your SaaS product. You've narrowed it down to three agencies. All have solid portfolios. All claim they can use "whatever tech stack works best for you." All promise "flexibility and adaptability."

How do you choose?

Now imagine one agency says: "We exclusively build with Svelte and TypeScript. We turn down React projects. Here's why performance matters more than framework popularity, and here's the data proving it."

If you care about performance, wouldn't that agency immediately stand out?

Here's the thing most agency founders get backwards:  they think staying neutral and offering everything helps them win more clients. In reality, it's why they're stuck competing on price with poor-fit clients who don't respect their expertise.

After running Okupter full-time for over a year, I've learned that your well-being as a founder, the success of your company, and the quality of work you deliver are all directly related to the strength of your opinions. Not manufactured positioning statements. Not vague "we believe in quality" platitudes. But actual, specific, defensible opinions about technology, process, and how work should be done.

The Real Cost of "We Do Everything" Positioning

If you're like most agency founders, you've experienced this cycle:

You cast a wide net because you need revenue. Your website lists every framework, methodology, and service under the sun. A lead comes in. They ask if you can work with their legacy Angular codebase even though you haven't touched Angular in three years. You say yes because you need the project.

Six months later, you're managing a nightmare client who questions every decision, negotiates every invoice, and treats your team like interchangeable code monkeys.

The biggest mistake we see?  Founders think this is just part of running an agency. Bad clients happen. Difficult projects are inevitable.

But here's what we've found: agencies without strong opinions attract clients who can't tell the difference between them and anyone else.  When you position yourself as "flexible" and "adaptable to any technology," you're actually saying "we don't have deep expertise in anything specific."

So clients default to the only differentiator they understand: price.

Why Generic Positioning Makes You Invisible

Look at your last five agency pitches. How many of them included phrases like:

• "We work with React, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and whatever framework best fits your needs"

• "Our team is experienced across the full technology stack"

• "We're flexible and can adapt to your existing processes"

These statements sound professional. They feel safe. And they make you completely forgettable.

When we started Okupter, I made the same mistake. I thought listing every technology I'd ever used would cast a wider net. More options = more opportunities, right?

Wrong.

What actually happened: prospects couldn't differentiate us from the dozens of other agencies saying the exact same thing. Without clear opinions to evaluate, they'd ask for detailed proposals from five agencies, then pick whoever came in cheapest.

The Contrarian Truth: Strong Opinions Are Client Filters, Not Limiters

Most agency founders fear that having strong opinions will turn away potential clients. They're right—but that's actually the point.

Strong opinions don't limit your opportunities. They filter your opportunities.

Here's what actually happens when you articulate clear, specific opinions about how work should be done:

The wrong clients self-select out.  Someone who wants a React project isn't going to waste your time (or theirs) asking for a proposal when you clearly specialize in Svelte.

The right clients lean in.  Someone who cares about performance and developer experience will see your Svelte specialization as expertise, not limitation.

Price becomes less relevant.  When clients understand your specific approach and why it matters, they're evaluating value, not just cost.

Let me show you what this looks like in practice.

How We Built Opinion-Driven Positioning at Okupter

I never sat down and manufactured these opinions for marketing purposes. That would have been transparent and ineffective. These opinions emerged naturally from how we work, what we've learned, and what we're willing to defend with data.

But once we articulated them clearly, everything changed.

Opinion #1: Performance Isn't Optional

As far as I can remember, I've been obsessed with web performance. When I started Okupter, the name itself came from the Ancient Greek word "ōkúpteros"—meaning fast, "swift-winged."

But here's where the opinion gets specific:  We don't just say "performance matters" (everyone says that). We say performance is a core value that influences every technology choice, every implementation decision, and every client conversation.

When a potential client asks about using a heavy framework with a large bundle size, we don't say "whatever you prefer." We show them the load time data. We explain the business impact. We make a recommendation.

Some clients appreciate this expertise. Others want a vendor who'll just do what they're told. That's the filter working.

Opinion #2: We Only Build with Svelte and SvelteKit

This is where most agencies get nervous. "What if someone wants React? You're turning away revenue!"

Yes. Intentionally.

When Okupter started as a blog about web development and performance, Svelte emerged as the framework that aligned with our values. It's fast. It's developer-friendly. It produces performant applications by default.

So we made a decision: specialize in Svelte and SvelteKit exclusively.

Here's what this opinion gave us:

Deep expertise.  Instead of being mediocre at five frameworks, we became exceptional at one. Our team knows Svelte's edge cases, performance patterns, and best practices at a level generalists can't match.

Clear differentiation.  When someone searches for "Svelte development agency," we're not competing with 10,000 React agencies. We're competing with a much smaller pool of specialists.

Better client fit.  Clients who choose us have already decided Svelte is the right choice (or they're open to being convinced). Either way, we're aligned before we even start.

We happily share this opinion with potential clients. And we're not afraid to turn down projects that don't align with it.

In over a year of operating this way, we haven't struggled to find work. We've struggled to keep up with qualified leads.

Opinion #3: TypeScript Isn't Negotiable

During my years as a software engineer in agencies and product companies, I've seen this pattern repeatedly:

A project starts in vanilla JavaScript because "we'll move fast and add types later." Six months in, a mysterious bug appears. The team spends three days tracking it down. The bug could have been caught in thirty seconds with TypeScript.

I've also seen the reverse: projects that started with TypeScript shipped faster, with fewer bugs, and were easier to maintain long-term.

So we developed this opinion: TypeScript should be the default for any serious project.

When we start greenfield projects, we advocate strongly for TypeScript. On existing codebases, we recommend migrating. And we're not afraid to turn down projects where clients insist on vanilla JavaScript for complex applications.

This opinion comes with receipts. We've seen client projects avoid 40+ hours of debugging by using TypeScript from day one. We've watched teams onboard new developers faster because the codebase is self-documenting. We've prevented production bugs that would have cost thousands to fix.

But here's the key:  we're not dogmatic for the sake of being difficult. We can explain exactly why this opinion exists, what problems it solves, and what data supports it.

That's what makes it credible.

Opinion #4: Don't Build Your Own Auth System

This one's controversial in developer circles. One of my most popular blog posts was a technical tutorial on implementing JWT authentication in SvelteKit. It was a great learning exercise for me—I believe in understanding how things work under the hood.

But here's what I learned after that post: for most client projects, building custom authentication is the wrong choice.

It's tedious. It's error-prone. It's a security risk if you don't get it exactly right. And it's not the best use of client budgets.

So we developed this opinion: authentication should be simple, secure, fast to implement, and easy to maintain.  In most scenarios, that means using a proven third-party solution.

We've successfully used Lucia for authentication in many projects. We recommend it often. And we're transparent about why we don't recommend rolling your own auth for most use cases.

Some developers hate this opinion.  They want to build everything from scratch. That's fine—they can work with agencies that share that opinion.

Some clients love this opinion.  They want their budget spent on features that differentiate their product, not reimplementing solved problems. Those clients are ideal for us.

Opinion #5: Happy Developers Ship Better Products

This is the meta-opinion that ties everything together.

We believe a happy developer is a productive developer. We believe the best way to build great products is with a team that's motivated, focused, and using tools they enjoy.

That's why our technology opinions matter. Svelte makes developers happy. TypeScript makes developers confident. Not building authentication from scratch means developers focus on interesting problems.

When we hire, we look for developers who share these values.  Not just people who can code—people who have opinions about how code should be written and are willing to defend those opinions with evidence.

This creates a self-reinforcing culture. Our team's happiness shows up in client work. Clients see the quality. They refer others who value the same things. The cycle continues.

How to Develop Opinion-Driven Positioning for Your Agency

You might be thinking: "This sounds great for a new agency, but we're already established as generalists. How do we transition?"

Here's the process we followed (and what I'd recommend):

Step 1: Audit Your Current Positioning

Open your website. Read your homepage. Look at your service pages.

How many times do you say "flexible," "adaptable," or "whatever works best for you"?

How many specific technology recommendations do you make?

If someone asked "What does this agency believe about building software?" could they answer from your website?

Most agencies fail this test.  That's okay—it's your starting point.

Step 2: Identify Opinions You Already Hold

Your team already has opinions. You just haven't articulated them publicly.

Pay attention to these signals:

What frustrates your team in Slack channels?  "Why did this client insist on using X when Y is clearly better?" That frustration is an opinion waiting to be documented.

What do you complain about after difficult projects?  "We should have pushed back harder on their architecture choice." That's an opinion you can articulate for future clients.

What advice do you give friends starting similar projects?  "Don't use that approach, use this one instead." Those recommendations are opinions.

We didn't invent our opinions. We noticed patterns in what we were already thinking and saying internally.

Step 3: Document and Validate with Evidence

The difference between a strong opinion and empty positioning is evidence.

For each opinion you identify, ask:

• Why do we believe this?

• What experience supports this opinion?

• What data can we point to?

• What would it take to change our mind?

Example from Okupter:

• Opinion: "Use TypeScript for complex applications"

• Why: We've seen too many late-stage bugs that types would have prevented

• Experience: Three client projects that avoided 40+ debugging hours by using TypeScript

• Data: Industry research showing TypeScript's impact on code quality

• What would change our mind: If TypeScript's tooling became significantly worse or if better alternatives emerged

Notice this isn't dogma. It's a defensible position based on experience.

Step 4: Communicate Your Opinions Publicly

This is where most agencies hesitate. They've identified opinions internally but are afraid to share them publicly.

But here's what we've found: your opinions only become positioning when clients can evaluate them.

Start with your website. Be specific about your approach:

Instead of:  "We work with modern JavaScript frameworks" Write:  "We specialize in Svelte and SvelteKit because performance and developer experience matter more than framework popularity"

Then reinforce through content. Write blog posts defending your opinions. Create case studies showing them in action. Share your reasoning on social media.

When Okupter published opinions about authentication, some developers disagreed in comments. That's fine. The clients who agreed saw us as experts. The ones who disagreed weren't our ideal clients anyway.

Step 5: Use Opinions to Qualify Projects

This is where opinions transform from marketing into business strategy.

When a prospect reaches out with a project that doesn't align with your opinions, you have a choice:

The old way:  Say yes, take the revenue, compromise your opinions, end up with a misaligned client.

The new way:  Politely decline, refer them to someone better suited, protect your positioning.

We've turned down React projects. We've passed on projects requiring vanilla JavaScript. We've referred prospects to other agencies when the fit wasn't right.

Each time we do this, our positioning gets stronger.  Clients see we mean what we say. Referral partners understand our specialization. And we avoid the nightmare projects that drain resources and morale.

Common Mistakes When Developing Strong Opinions

After a year of operating this way (and advising other agencies), I've seen three mistakes repeatedly:

Mistake #1: Manufacturing Fake Opinions

Some agencies pick a niche or technology stance purely for marketing purposes. They don't actually believe it. Their team doesn't share it. They'd abandon it for the right project.

Clients see through this immediately.

Your opinions must be authentic. They should emerge from real experience, actual frustrations, and genuine beliefs about how work should be done.

If you don't actually have an opinion about something, don't fake one.

Mistake #2: Being Contrarian for Attention

There's a difference between having strong opinions and being deliberately controversial for clicks.

"Everyone uses React so we'll never touch it" isn't an opinion—it's contrarianism. "We specialize in Svelte because it produces faster applications with less code" is an opinion backed by reasoning.

Your opinions should be defensible, not just different.

Mistake #3: Never Evolving Your Opinions

Strong opinions don't mean rigid thinking.

If Svelte's ecosystem dried up tomorrow, we'd reevaluate. If TypeScript became unmaintainable, we'd reconsider. If we discovered a better authentication approach, we'd update our recommendation.

The strongest opinions are those held with conviction but open to evidence.

What we won't do is change our opinions because a single prospect disagrees. That defeats the entire purpose of having them.

What This Means for Your Agency

If you're an agency founder struggling to differentiate in a crowded market, competing on price, or attracting clients who don't respect your expertise, strong opinions might be your missing positioning strategy.

Here's what to do next:

List 3-5 strong opinions your team actually holds  about technology, process, or how client work should be done. Not what sounds good—what you genuinely believe.

Find one opinion you can defend with data or experience  from past projects. Write down the specific evidence that supports it.

Start saying no to one type of project  that doesn't align with your opinions. Just one. See what happens.

In our experience, agencies willing to do this hard work emerge with clarity of purpose that generalists can never match. Your team will feel invested in ideas they helped forge. Your clients will recognize your authenticity.

In a sea of agencies professing they can meet any need, you'll be the beacon broadcasting specific expertise.

And strong opinions—forged through scrutiny rather than declarations—become a lighthouse steering the right clients to your shores.

Because at the end of the day, you don't want every client. You want the ones who value what you believe in, respect what you've built, and are willing to pay for genuine expertise.

Those clients don't choose the cheapest option. They choose the agency with the clearest point of view.