Should Zepz prioritize expanding its global remittance network to more countries or focus on improving transaction speeds for existing corridors?

Introduction

The trade-off between expanding Zepz's global remittance network to more countries or improving transaction speeds for existing corridors is a critical decision that will shape our product strategy and impact our users worldwide. This scenario touches on key aspects of our business, including market expansion, user experience, and technological capabilities. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining our product ecosystem, identifying key metrics, designing experiments, and providing a data-driven recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: I'm thinking about our current market position. Could you share our top 3 existing corridors by transaction volume and their average processing times?

Why it matters: Helps prioritize which corridors to focus on for speed improvements Expected answer: US-Mexico, UK-India, UAE-Philippines with varying processing times Impact: Would influence whether to prioritize high-volume or underperforming corridors

• Business Context: Based on our revenue model, I assume we charge a percentage fee per transaction. Is this correct, and are there any fixed fees involved?

Why it matters: Helps understand the financial impact of expansion vs. speed improvement Expected answer: Yes, percentage-based with a small fixed fee Impact: Would affect the potential revenue gain from new countries vs. existing corridors

• User Impact: I'm curious about our user retention rates. What percentage of our users are repeat customers, and how does this vary between fast and slow corridors?

Why it matters: Indicates the importance of speed in user retention Expected answer: Higher retention in faster corridors, possibly 70% vs. 50% Impact: Strong correlation would favor improving speeds; weak correlation might suggest expansion

• Technical: Regarding our current infrastructure, what's the main bottleneck in transaction speed? Is it primarily on our end or due to partner banks in recipient countries?

Why it matters: Determines the feasibility and approach to speed improvements Expected answer: Mix of internal processing and partner bank delays Impact: If mostly internal, we'd focus on our systems; if external, we'd prioritize partner negotiations

• Resource: Can you give me an idea of our current team capacity? Do we have more bandwidth in our expansion team or our engineering team focused on speed optimization?

Why it matters: Helps assess the feasibility of each option given our current resources Expected answer: Engineering team at capacity, expansion team has some bandwidth Impact: Might favor expansion if engineering resources are constrained