Why Signet exists

I was helping run a four-person startup. We were careful with money in every direction — we argued about a $12 SaaS subscription — and then one afternoon I opened the e-signature invoice and it was more than our entire cloud bill. Not because we were doing anything exotic. We had just sent contracts. Each one metered as an “envelope”, each envelope quietly priced like it had been couriered across the country.

What stung was not the number. It was realising that we were paying a premium for a product that, underneath, was storing a PNG of someone’s name and a database row that said completed. If the deal had ever been disputed, we would have had a picture of a signature and a vendor’s word for it.

So I started Signet with a blunt goal: cut what small companies pay for signatures by at least half, and give them a better evidence record than the expensive tools were handing them. Flat monthly pricing. Unlimited documents. No envelope counter deciding whether you can afford to send one more contract before the month ends.

The startups I built this for are the ones deciding between a signing tool and another week of runway. That trade-off should not exist. Sending a contract is table stakes; it should cost about as much as a couple of coffees and it should never surprise you.

Every signature Signet creates is bound to the exact version of the document the signer’s browser rendered. Every event is written once, hash-chained to the one before it, and checkpointed. Verification recomputes the chain rather than reading a boolean out of a table — and anyone can run it without an account.

That is the whole thesis: charge small teams a fair, flat price, and still hand them the stronger record. Those two things were never actually in tension. They were just priced as if they were.