Fabric started from the convergence of two trends I first noticed in March 2024, just as I was starting the Entrepreneur First cohort [link to come]:

My cofounder Eeshita [link to come] and I saw this as an amazing opportunity to build an infrastructure that would enable the upcoming wave of consumer AI apps to seamlessly access this new kind of data, and provide personalized experiences never seen before.

The same infrastructure, a different silo

From a technical point of view, the infrastructure was really similar to what me and Luca [link to come] had been building as part of Omnia. Instead of making data from IoT devices easily accessible, we would now be doing the same for data from big tech companies. The infamous big tech data silos were coming down — and this highly resonated with my desire for digital sovereignty.

Plaid, but for search and social data

On the other hand, my cofounder Eeshita, right before EF, had been working at the consumer fintech Cleo, whose business had been enabled by another company called Plaid. In the same way Plaid had made financial data available to consumer apps, Fabric would make search and social data available to the emerging consumer AI apps.

The thesis

We were the perfect team with a simple thesis — one that at the time was controversial: consumer apps will pay to access personal user data.

The thesis on a whiteboard, broken into its two halves: (A) B2C apps already pay for services that improve their product — Plaid takes ~2% of a fintech's revenue, Terra does the same for health; (B) new, genuinely useful personal data was becoming available now, with the DMA unlocking digital real-time user data.

The core of the infrastructure

At the core of the infrastructure we built, there was:

The landscape we were mapping: the big data producers (search, social, financial, IoT) on one side, the small data producer — the individual — in the middle, and the data consumers (hedge funds, retailers, brands) on the other, with data flowing one way and money the other. In red, the regulation opening it all up: the Digital Markets Act for big tech, and the Data Act by the end of 2025.

The missing piece

The vision was clear from the beginning. What was missing was figuring out who needed this data the most.

The same question written down as risk: no signed contract or big sales pipeline, no end-customer UX de-risking, a generalisable use case that was still unclear, and no or limited API access — next to the questions of how big and how valuable this could get.

Two paths, one team

By the end of 2024, we saw two potential paths:

The write-up weighing the two, on the premise that doing both well at the same time was not possible. Agents: catching the right wave could bring us extremely far and ignoring it was not an option, but we were not best positioned right now, could only target European users, and the market was extremely unclear. Brands: immediate revenue and excellent distribution potential, use cases in loyalty, acquisition and segmentation, and a team extremely well positioned to win — against a crowded space and the risk of missing the future for the present.

Initially, we decided to go for the latter — going after fashion brands and retailers — but eventually we also tried the former [link to come].