A serious next step
for your big idea.

No. Ore said the student-only first cohort was a pilot; the second would be open to founders aged 18 and over with substantial Base44 use.

Applications were announced for 1 October 2026, with interviews during that period and the program beginning roughly a month later. The waiting list was available first.

Be at least 18 and incorporate Base44 substantially into the venture. Ore described international participation and flexibility across industries and stages. Acceptance still involves application review; meeting those basics is not a guarantee.

Ore said there was no fee to join and no equity taken. The session did not discuss travel expenses or every third-party perk condition.

Business mentorship, a Base44 technical mentor, weekly masterclasses, vendor perks, and help connecting with investors were described. Selected top teams would pitch in New York; winners had additional benefits.

No. It is up to $1 million in combined credits and partner resources, subject to the relevant programs. A separate cash prize was mentioned without an amount.

Ore preferred it but said it was not required for the waiting list. That list was for notifying people when formal applications opened.

Ore described an approximately 30-second startup pitch video, probably a pitch deck, and an app link, followed by interviews. These were previews of the upcoming process rather than a final application form demonstrated live.

No. Substantial use can take different forms: the product itself, a meaningful internal business tool, or an integrated Superagent. Ore said the application should make that role clear.

Ore explicitly accepted backend-as-a-service use as a possible qualifying integration.

No. A Superagent was one example. Using the app builder, or another substantial Base44 role, can satisfy the platform-use requirement.

Ore estimated one or two virtual hours per week for twelve weeks. That describes program sessions, not the additional time a founder may spend building the business.

Ore said the weekly masterclasses were reserved for accelerator members. Alumni of the first cohort would be able to access the later program.

Ore said applications were welcome across industries. The session did not waive legal, regulatory, platform, or partner-program requirements for any sector.

Yes. More traction improves the chance of acceptance, but lack of revenue does not automatically disqualify a founder. Ore still encouraged early-stage applications and using the month before opening to make progress.

No fixed threshold was stated. Ore welcomed an example with over 100 users and 15 paid users and said a venture with six users and revenue could also apply. These were examples, not formal acceptance cutoffs.

Yes. Ore said traction need not be solely user-count based; meaningful transaction volume can be relevant evidence.

Choose one venture for the application and program. Ore said the team supports founders and can accommodate a reasoned pivot, but applicants should not submit a bundle of unrelated apps as their program focus.

Yes. The hosts said names and positioning can evolve, and Ore allowed justified pivots. The application did not require a permanently frozen brand.

Yes. Ore encouraged getting real feedback from the first users and explaining how it could serve the wider industry. Pre-revenue status was acceptable.

Ore said moderators were welcome. Sam said he could not participate in contests or programs as an employee.

Sam said the platform has internal systems for suspicious activity, but builders remain responsible for their own app permissions. Use security checks and role-based testing, and contact technical support for a specific incident. No attack or security assurance was verified live.

Sam directed viewers to Basecamp's events and community directory. The directory was still small and undergoing review; richer discovery was a longer-term aim.

Sam advised completing Stripe's own account setup first and using the guided Base44 connector. He suggested returning to a version before the attempted manual integration if appropriate. The actual app was not inspected, so no production rollback or payment flow was verified.

Sam suggested starting with a Superagent using the user's existing problem statement, while acknowledging context-size difficulties. npm tools or a coding environment such as Codex were alternative avenues. He had not solved that particular workload and offered no supported file-size limit.

Sam was unfamiliar with it, looked briefly, and said he would explore it. He gave no integration commitment or roadmap answer.

Sam described partners as established builders available for client work, identifiable through their Base44 profile badge and partner directory. He said level two permits applying and level three permits directory listing; application is not automatic.

Sam had paused them after a recent incident and wanted automated voice moderation before reopening them. He said it was not a judgment about a particular person asking to speak.

Sam said new models are tested internally and considered on performance. He did not give a timeline or review of the model raised in chat.

Sam said support was still being developed. He described external custom wrappers with RevenueCat as a workaround, not a feature available through Base44's official wrapper at that time.

A separate wrapper can include a native purchase layer outside the web app but inside the store build. Sam said this permits integrations such as RevenueCat; the official Base44 wrapper did not expose that custom layer. Implementation and store compliance still require work.

Sam said Base One is tailored to Base44, while other models depend on supplied context. He suggested a reviewed Markdown skill containing relevant platform knowledge as a way to give other models more context, noting that large inputs can make prompts expensive.