Four markets on the roadmap. One readiness score, or none at all
The client's wallet launch plan named Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Thailand as a single wave, sequenced by headline market size rather than by how ready each market actually was to receive a new wallet.
Licensing requirements, local payment-rail access, agent-network density and real consumer demand differ sharply market by market, and none of those differences show up in a market-sizing model built from published data alone.
The client needed a readiness score, not another sizing estimate, before it committed launch budget to a sequence it could not defend market by market.
We tested each market the way a regulator and a rival wallet would
Regulator-facing legal and compliance experts walked through licensing timelines and requirements market by market, rather than reading them off a public summary that misses local interpretation.
Local payment service providers detailed rail access and settlement mechanics, and prospective distribution partners assessed agent-network economics and existing wallet density on the ground.
Each market was scored on the same framework, licensing timeline, rail access, agent-network economics and consumer demand, so the four scores could sit side by side rather than stand alone.
Two markets cleared for launch. Two did not, and the client knew why
The readiness scoring separated two markets viable within the client's planning horizon from two where licensing timelines and incumbent wallet density made near-term entry unattractive.
That distinction redirected launch investment before commitments were made, rather than after a difficult market had already absorbed budget and time.
The client now had a documented, market-by-market case for its actual sequence, not just its original one.
