For Rapyd's Disburse offering, should we invest in developing more local payout options or concentrate on reducing fees for cross-border transactions?

Introduction

For Rapyd's Disburse offering, we're facing a critical decision between investing in more local payout options or focusing on reducing fees for cross-border transactions. This trade-off involves balancing the expansion of our service capabilities against improving the cost-effectiveness of our existing offerings. I'll analyze this decision through the lens of product strategy, user impact, technical feasibility, and business alignment.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Based on our current market position, I'm thinking local payout options might be a key differentiator. Could you share how our current local payout coverage compares to our main competitors?

Why it matters: Helps assess the competitive landscape and potential market gaps. Expected answer: We're behind in certain regions but ahead in others. Impact on approach: Would influence whether to focus on underserved markets or strengthen existing strongholds.

• Considering our revenue model, I'm assuming transaction fees are a significant portion. What percentage of our revenue comes from cross-border transaction fees versus local payout fees?

Why it matters: Helps understand the financial implications of focusing on either option. Expected answer: Cross-border fees contribute 60% of revenue, local payouts 40%. Impact on approach: Would determine which option aligns better with our current revenue streams and growth potential.

• Looking at user behavior, I'm curious about the pain points in our current offering. What's the primary feedback from users regarding local payout options versus cross-border fees?

Why it matters: Identifies the most pressing user needs and potential areas for improvement. Expected answer: Users value variety in local options but are price-sensitive to cross-border fees. Impact on approach: Would guide prioritization based on user preferences and potential impact on satisfaction.

• From a technical standpoint, I'm wondering about the complexity of implementing new local payout options versus optimizing our fee structure. How does our current architecture support these potential changes?

Why it matters: Assesses the feasibility and resource requirements for each option. Expected answer: Adding local options is more complex but our system is modular; fee adjustments are simpler but require careful financial modeling. Impact on approach: Would influence the timeline and resource allocation for each option.

• Considering our strategic roadmap, how urgent is this decision in relation to other initiatives we have planned for the next 6-12 months?

Why it matters: Helps prioritize this decision within the broader context of our product strategy. Expected answer: It's a high priority for Q3-Q4 to support our expansion goals. Impact on approach: Would determine the depth of analysis needed and the timeline for implementation.