For Sundae's investor marketplace, should we focus on expanding the investor pool or improving deal quality for existing investors?

Introduction

The trade-off we're examining for Sundae's investor marketplace is whether to focus on expanding the investor pool or improving deal quality for existing investors. This decision is crucial for the platform's growth and sustainability. I'll analyze this trade-off by considering various factors, including business context, user impact, technical feasibility, and resource allocation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Business Context: I'm thinking Sundae's revenue model might be based on transaction fees. Could you confirm how Sundae generates revenue from the investor marketplace?

Why it matters: Helps align our strategy with the core business model Expected answer: Commission on successful property transactions Impact on approach: Would influence whether we prioritize transaction volume or value

• User Impact: Based on the trade-off, I assume we have two primary user segments: investors and property sellers. Can you provide more details on the current investor demographics and their pain points?

Why it matters: Helps tailor our approach to user needs and behaviors Expected answer: Mix of individual and institutional investors with varying capital levels Impact on approach: Would inform whether to focus on attracting new investor types or enhancing existing investor experience

• Technical Feasibility: I'm curious about our current platform capabilities. What technical limitations might we face in expanding the investor pool or improving deal quality?

Why it matters: Ensures our strategy aligns with technical constraints Expected answer: Scalability issues with vetting new investors or limited data for deal quality improvements Impact on approach: Would influence the feasibility and timeline of each option

• Resource Allocation: Considering this trade-off, I'm wondering about our current team structure. How are our product and engineering resources currently allocated between investor acquisition and deal quality improvement?

Why it matters: Helps understand the effort required for each option Expected answer: More resources currently focused on investor acquisition Impact on approach: Would inform the ease of pivoting resources to deal quality improvement

• Timeline and Urgency: Given that we're considering this trade-off, I'm assuming there's some urgency. What's driving the timeline for this decision, and are there any upcoming milestones we need to consider?

Why it matters: Helps prioritize short-term vs. long-term strategies Expected answer: Pressure to show growth in transaction volume or value within next two quarters Impact on approach: Would influence whether we opt for quick wins or longer-term strategic changes