All of the problems they listed seem quite solvable. And it seems like it's saving a lot of time.

But saying AI is doing good doesn't generate the same number of clicks!

Secondly, a lot of the apps built on lovable are for internal purposes and not necessarily used publicly.

Honestly I could go on and on with various points to refute your dumb comment.

Is lovable worth 13B? Probably not, but I completely get why people think it is. It serves a market of non technical people that want to build apps and websites without having to use something horrible like Wordpress.

This is what I got first time with a humanizer I built, still sounds terrible:

"Yeah, an LLM gets you the 10-minute demo now.

The expensive part is everything after, once real users depend on it. You end up maintaining editable state, templates, email-safe HTML, export pipelines, asset handling, permissions, custom blocks, and live previews. That takes months.

Structure makes AI output usable here, and it gets more important as the workflow gets automated. That's the idea behind Unlayer Elements. The LLM generates real editable components that map back into the actual email or page, and you keep editing what it makes like anything else in the tool.

I'd prototype with the LLM. I'd bring in Unlayer once that content layer becomes real infrastructure you don't want to own yourself."

For instance, the usage of "Totally fair" and "The hard part", the usage of colons, which humans would use far less frequently, using the rule of threes (editable email, web page or document), etc.

Anyway, it's just lazy. This is someone trying to sell their product. They should be able to speak about it without using the exact response from an AI

So pre-money in this case is their valuation even before they've received any investment.