founders thinking about cross-border expansion, this is the kind of pattern we keep flagging in our reads about VC signals. the Sherpa metaphor for opaque markets is one we'd love to write more on
Cross-border expansion is definitely not a one-size-fits-all endeavor. I prefer to follow the advice: "If you know one market, you know one market." Every market is nuanced and requires local expertise, rigorous market validation, and thoughtful pricing adjustments.
In the medical device industry, for example, companies often attempt to charge the same prices in Latin America as they do in the US or Europe — and they end up being adopted only by the top 5% of customers because the broader market simply cannot absorb the cost. That is not market penetration; that is market exclusion.
I have also seen companies assume they can skip the hard work of building key opinion leaders in local markets. Having a large install base on one continent does not mean another continent will automatically recognize that authority or embrace premium pricing. Each new market demands its own proof of value — demos, introductory pricing, local clinical champions, and genuine relationship-building on the ground. There are no shortcuts, and the companies that try to take them rarely achieve the scale they are targeting.
Thanks Alex for having me contribute to 99%Tech. One thing that became clear across the 50+ interviews for Mind the Gap is that international expansion failures are rarely caused by weak products alone.
More often, companies misread how trust, distribution, incentives, and decision-making actually work on the ground in a given market.
Appreciate all the thoughtful feedback and discussion around the piece.
![[99%Tech]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!Vpj7!,w_120,h_120,c_fill,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F288cd65c-980f-4acb-8182-1853ec1e444d_1280x1280.png)
founders thinking about cross-border expansion, this is the kind of pattern we keep flagging in our reads about VC signals. the Sherpa metaphor for opaque markets is one we'd love to write more on
Cross-border expansion is definitely not a one-size-fits-all endeavor. I prefer to follow the advice: "If you know one market, you know one market." Every market is nuanced and requires local expertise, rigorous market validation, and thoughtful pricing adjustments.
In the medical device industry, for example, companies often attempt to charge the same prices in Latin America as they do in the US or Europe — and they end up being adopted only by the top 5% of customers because the broader market simply cannot absorb the cost. That is not market penetration; that is market exclusion.
I have also seen companies assume they can skip the hard work of building key opinion leaders in local markets. Having a large install base on one continent does not mean another continent will automatically recognize that authority or embrace premium pricing. Each new market demands its own proof of value — demos, introductory pricing, local clinical champions, and genuine relationship-building on the ground. There are no shortcuts, and the companies that try to take them rarely achieve the scale they are targeting.
Thanks Alex for having me contribute to 99%Tech. One thing that became clear across the 50+ interviews for Mind the Gap is that international expansion failures are rarely caused by weak products alone.
More often, companies misread how trust, distribution, incentives, and decision-making actually work on the ground in a given market.
Appreciate all the thoughtful feedback and discussion around the piece.