Dmitry Gurski

Yeah, for some extent, but you may solve this problem by org structure. You may create teams which solely focused on own part of the product, and for them it's a single product, and they have full focus on this product. And in our company, each team has own part of product to own. Then you have a difficulty to combine all this product.

parts to the single experience and it's not easy it's very challenging but it's the way how to have focus in the case of super app what have been the biggest lessons in how to create that synchronicity between the different parts it's extremely difficult we're still struggling is that the biggest weakness that you have today do you think

parts to the single experience and it's not easy it's very challenging but it's the way how to have focus in the case of super app what have been the biggest lessons in how to create that synchronicity between the different parts it's extremely difficult we're still struggling is that the biggest weakness that you have today do you think

parts to the single experience and it's not easy it's very challenging but it's the way how to have focus in the case of super app what have been the biggest lessons in how to create that synchronicity between the different parts it's extremely difficult we're still struggling is that the biggest weakness that you have today do you think

I think it's really significant to save simplicity for our product because each year we have deep research of our user base. What is the most significant for them in our product? And for seven or eight years in a row, the most popular answer is simplicity. Simplicity, nothing else.

I think it's really significant to save simplicity for our product because each year we have deep research of our user base. What is the most significant for them in our product? And for seven or eight years in a row, the most popular answer is simplicity. Simplicity, nothing else.

I think it's really significant to save simplicity for our product because each year we have deep research of our user base. What is the most significant for them in our product? And for seven or eight years in a row, the most popular answer is simplicity. Simplicity, nothing else.

And the biggest mistake we may do is that we destroy this simplicity because it's the essence of our success and it's the essence of success for any product. And it's really difficult to have simplicity when you have so many features and when you have this concept of super app.

And the biggest mistake we may do is that we destroy this simplicity because it's the essence of our success and it's the essence of success for any product. And it's really difficult to have simplicity when you have so many features and when you have this concept of super app.

And the biggest mistake we may do is that we destroy this simplicity because it's the essence of our success and it's the essence of success for any product. And it's really difficult to have simplicity when you have so many features and when you have this concept of super app.

It was always difficult.

It was always difficult.

It was always difficult.

No, because you need to meet hundreds of investors and repeat the same, and at some moment it's just boring. You're just repeating the same, the same again, again, again, again. It's just boring. Was there one or two that stood out? I'm not trying to flatter them, but I'm really impressed by General Atlantic.

No, because you need to meet hundreds of investors and repeat the same, and at some moment it's just boring. You're just repeating the same, the same again, again, again, again. It's just boring. Was there one or two that stood out? I'm not trying to flatter them, but I'm really impressed by General Atlantic.

No, because you need to meet hundreds of investors and repeat the same, and at some moment it's just boring. You're just repeating the same, the same again, again, again, again. It's just boring. Was there one or two that stood out? I'm not trying to flatter them, but I'm really impressed by General Atlantic.

At the end of this process, we had five bidders, and I had a really big hope that General Atlantic would not provide a bad term sheet because they showed so much better understanding of our business model. so deep approach, then they really impressed me by the depth of work. And I'm really happy by this outcome. I'm not even flattering. It's not my nature, but I was kind of praying.

At the end of this process, we had five bidders, and I had a really big hope that General Atlantic would not provide a bad term sheet because they showed so much better understanding of our business model. so deep approach, then they really impressed me by the depth of work. And I'm really happy by this outcome. I'm not even flattering. It's not my nature, but I was kind of praying.

At the end of this process, we had five bidders, and I had a really big hope that General Atlantic would not provide a bad term sheet because they showed so much better understanding of our business model. so deep approach, then they really impressed me by the depth of work. And I'm really happy by this outcome. I'm not even flattering. It's not my nature, but I was kind of praying.

Firstly, they had a very deep understanding of our business model because of previous investment to Duolingo and HS Commer and similar companies. And it's really rare to see investors with a deep understanding of consumer subscriptions because there are not so many successful consumer subscriptions and just several public companies based on this business model.