Kaeda
Free · Sourced
← All cases
Jane App
Founded 2012 · North Vancouver · under $10M raised · $1.8B (2025)
👤 Alison Taylor & Trevor Johnston (Ali owned the clinic; Trevor, her brand designer, heard her daily software rants and built Jane inside her practice in 6 weeks.)🌐 siteLinkedInLinkedIn

A clinic owner's loud complaints about ugly booking software became a $100M-ARR OS for 240,000 practitioners.

Will it work? · our read
Be your user. Ali didn't study the market — she was the market, with a captive first clinic. That insider fit, not clever tech, is why polished rivals never caught Jane's craft.
01How the money moves
Clinic subscribes, flat rate $54-99/mo
Adds practitioners (+$5/mo) and add-ons: AI Scribe $15, insurance billing
Recurring subscriptions compound to $100M ARR
02The numbers
$100M
ARR, founder-stated
BetaKit
240K+
practitioners
jane.app
$1.8B
valuation (2025)
Techcouver
Founder-stated ARR; under $10M ever raised; valuation from a reported 2025 secondary. BetaKit
$100M ARR, bootstrapped to a $1.8B valuation.
03Weight class — CENTStap an axis
ControlEntryNeedTimeScale
Control High
Owns its product, brand and direct ties to 240,000 practitioners; no app-store or platform landlord skims the top.
04The key move
Build inside your clinic
Not market research — Ali built Jane inside Canopy, her own clinic and first captive user. Each feature solved a real workflow, so Jane fit physio, massage and mental-health clinics that rivals only guessed at.
fact
The counter-intuitive move
Being your own user can overfit to one clinic's habits. Jane dodged it by licensing to thousands early, letting many disciplines pull the roadmap outward.
our read
05Where the moat is
Why clinics stay:
Years of patient charts = brutal switching costDesign polish in a field of ugly EMRsWord-of-mouth in tight practitioner circlesOne system spans many disciplines at once
06How it diesmedium confidence
The losing version ships a calendar but skips insurance billing and compliance. Clinics need claims paid, not just bookings — a rival owning messy US and UK insurance could out-boring Jane and take its clinics. our read
Show evidence · counter
Evidence: Insurance Billing is a paid add-on on the Practice/Thrive plans; AI Scribe is $15 per practitioner/mo (jane.app/pricing).
Counter: But Jane already sells insurance billing and AI Scribe as paid add-ons, and years of patient charts make switching brutal.
07Against rivals
Jane App$54-99/mo
SimplePractice$29+/mo
Cliniko$49+/mo
Practice Better$25+/mo
Allied-health practice mgmt is crowded; Jane wins on craft and multi-discipline fit, not on price. our read
08Who uses it
PhysiotherapistsMassage therapistsChiropractorsMental-health counselorsNaturopaths & acupuncturists
Would it work for you?
Which profession's ugly, hated software do you know from the inside?
Ali didn't research clinics — she ran one. Insider pain is the unfair edge here. We don't score you — you answer.
🚀Use it as a launchpada prompt for your own AI
Copy → paste into your AI → then develop it freely in the conversation.
You are a sharp, honest startup strategist. Use the proven case below as a launchpad for MY idea — help me find my own angle, not copy it. <my_profile> Domain I know: [your domain] My unfair advantage (access/audience): [your edge] Interests: [your interests] Resources & goal: [your resources] · [your goal] </my_profile> <case name="Jane App" model="saas"> What it does: A vertical practice-management SaaS: online booking, charting and billing for one profession's clinics. Why it won (moat): Being a practitioner yourself, plus years of patient-record lock-in and word-of-mouth in a tight field. Weakest axis (CENTS): Low barriers — many rivals sell similar tools to the same clinics; you win on fit and craft, not features. How it could die: Skipping the boring insurance and compliance work; clinics need claims paid, not just a pretty calendar. </case> <task> Be a skeptical operator, not a cheerleader. No generic startup platitudes. If my angle is weak, say so plainly. First, a reality check: markets like this mostly fail. State the honest base rate (how crowded/hard is this?) and the ONE specific thing that would have to be true for ME to be the exception — grounded in my profile above. Then a compact table: - Fit — does this pattern suit my edge, or fight my gap? - Angle — my sharpest differentiation vs Jane App (concrete, not "better UX") - Distribution — exactly where my first 100 users come from (this is the hardest part — be specific, not "content marketing") - Risk — its "how it dies" (above) in MY situation Finish with one line: "The single thing to do next." Use only the facts above; if data is thin, say so — never invent numbers. Then stay with me and go deeper on whatever I ask — tech stack, rough cost & time, the smallest MVP to test, pricing, or timing. </task>
✓ Copied — paste into your AI
👤Placeholders like [your domain] auto-fill from your profile — example values for now.Set up profile →
Sourcesupdated · daily
Revenue: $100M ARR is first-party — Alison Taylor stated it publicly at BetaKit Town Hall Vancouver (Oct 22, 2024), so sourced STATED, verified true. The $1.8B valuation is a reported 2025 secondary deal (third-party). Latka's $25M (2022) is a third-party estimate, shown only as directional history. Practitioner count (240K+) matches jane.app's current site; third-party figures vary by date (BetaKit reported about 190,000 in Feb 2025), so treat the exact figure as a moving target, not a fixed fact. Founding story and pricing are first-party (jane.app). Competitor prices are approximate entry tiers, not exact quotes. No drama invented: Jane won on dogfooding, design craft and patient bootstrapping — not a single dramatic pivot. We never score you.