· Sean Barrett

Toast: Sticky SaaS — The Restaurant Category Killer (Business Breakdowns)

Toast is a vertical-SaaS category killer whose real moats — purpose-built hardware, feet-on-the-street distribution, and multi-tenant data — are structurally hard to clone, and AI (Toast IQ, Toast Grow) widens rather than erodes its lead, making the SaaS-apocalypse thesis a repeat of the 2015 open-source-on-AWS scare.

vertical-saasmoatsaihardwarecategory-killerfintechrestaurants0% confidence

Why this is in the corpus

Third-party investor/analyst breakdown of Toast that complements the operator (Aman Narang) interview already in the corpus — rich in moat taxonomy, TAM-build logic, Munger mental-model framing, and a live SaaS-apocalypse-vs-category-killer tension.

Summary for skimmers

Analyst Sean Barrett (Counter Global, 15% position) argues Toast is a mispriced 25%+ compounder: five TAMs unlocked, hardware and distribution moats competitors underestimate, agentic AI driving 20x-ROI products, churn as a challenger advantage, and DoorDash caught in an innovator's dilemma by free delivery.

Briefing

What survives the editorial filter

This page should feel like a smart colleague already listened for you and left only the operating logic worth keeping. Not everything said in the episode makes it through.

Trust signal

Direct episode extraction

Best used for

Decision-grade retrieval metadata not yet added for this episode.

Hold lightly

No explicit downgrade reason stored yet for this episode.

Principles

Durable claims that survive beyond the speaker's biography — each with explicit limits, transferability judgment, and evidence.

Principle

Purpose-built hardware is a structural moat competitors keep mistaking for a cost to avoid

The hardware nobody wants to build is exactly the moat, because the shortcut version fails in the field.

Toast committed to specialized restaurant hardware years ago; rivals who leapfrogged with iPads found the devices broke under water, liquid and heat, and customers returned to Toast's purpose-built devices.

In physical operating environments, hardware you'd rather not build is often the deepest moat.

Turns out iPads dont work very well in restaurants. They break all the time. They dont do well with water and liquid and heat. What was a shortcut at the beginning for some of those competitors actually led to their demise or made it so that they couldnt gain share.Sean Barrett

Reinforces the operator (Narang) hardware-moat claim from a third-party analyst vantage.

Principle

An under-monetized take rate is latent pricing power you can harvest as you scale

Deliberately pricing below the market band stores up future margin and pricing power.

Toast nets 49 bips versus competitors' 75-125 bips and, as one of the biggest US merchants by volume, can both raise its take rate and optimize interchange costs over time.

Leaving room below the competitive price band is latent, harvestable pricing power.

That 49 basis points has been moving up over time as its reasonably under-monetized versus what you see in the rest of the space. Most competitors charge 75 bips to 125 bips from a net gross profit take rate perspective.Sean Barrett

Quantified pricing-power headroom.

Principle

Local markets tip into a self-reinforcing flywheel once share crosses roughly ten percent

Local share compounds non-linearly once it passes a ~10% density threshold.

City-level data shows Toast starting at 2%, then 4%, then 6% — but past 10% the market "decides" to standardize, and 25-30% cities add share faster than smaller ones.

Watch for the local tipping point where adoption stops being linear.

when a market hits ten percent of market share, it becomes what management calls a flywheel market, and thats when the network effects take hold and the market decides it will standardize on Toast. And then you actually see market shares accelerate faster as they get bigger.Sean Barrett

Concrete network-effects threshold; quantified.

Principle

High industry churn is a structural advantage for the better-product challenger

A superior challenger wins faster in a high-churn market because churn creates constant at-bats.

Restaurants churn ~15% a year; with ~100,000 opening annually and Toast winning half on a gross basis, high industry turnover is precisely what lets the challenger take share quickly.

Evaluate churn from the challenger's seat: low retention can be an entry advantage.

The interesting thing from a churn perspective is that its actually a huge positive for the challenger, like Toast. There are some industries out there with 99% retention. Theres no churn. And even if you have a better product, you come in with a hugely advantaged product, customers arent gonna churn, and youre gonna get one percent of the industrySean Barrett

Counterintuitive reframing of churn as an asset.

Principle

Make your customer more profitable and you inherit their retention through survivorship

Improving your customer's economics buys retention via survivorship, not just lock-in.

A typical restaurant runs ~10% margins; a Toast customer runs ~15%, taking home 50% more dollars — so Toast restaurants survive more often, blunting the expected rise in churn as Toast scales.

Tie your success to your customer's survival and churn takes care of itself.

their businesses are so much more profitable using Toast than they were otherwise, that they just become healthier businesses that survive more. So theres a big survivorship bias in the industry within Toast customers.Sean Barrett

Mechanism behind Toast's stable churn as it scales.

Principle

Vertical multi-tenant category killers thrive through platform disruption, not despite it

Not all SaaS is equal — vertical, multi-tenant category killers get stronger from the same AI wave that threatens horizontal software.

Barrett separates the software universe: coding and DevOps face real disruption, but vertical winners with data, hardware and distribution moats compound faster because they can deploy new models across an entire installed base instantly.

Don't paint all SaaS with one brush; the moat structure decides whether AI is a threat or a tailwind.

there are also a handful of category killers, vertical market winners, and infrastructure software companies that are thriving and in a better spot now because of AI than they were a few years ago.Sean Barrett

Core rebuttal to the SaaS-apocalypse thesis; anchors the episode.

Principle

In any capitalist system the specialist captures the outsize share of the economics

Specialists, not generalists, win the disproportionate economics in a given market.

Barrett invokes Charlie Munger's mental model that the specialist wins outsize economics, arguing Toast checks every box as the restaurant specialist.

Bet on the specialist to capture the economics of a category.

in any capitalist system, the specialist wins the outsize share of the economics. He famously quoted that in a lot of his speeches.Sean Barrett

Munger mental-model framing central to Counter Global's thesis.

Principle

AI widens the gap for cloud-native platforms because on-premise rivals cannot ship model updates fast enough

The faster models improve, the more the cloud-native incumbent pulls away from on-premise rivals.

Because OpenAI and Claude ship new models every week or two, on-premise vendors requiring technician visits simply cannot keep pace, so accelerating AI is a tailwind that widens Toast's lead.

Deployment architecture determines who can actually capture the AI wave.

If youre an on-premise platform and you have to send a technician out to a restaurant to update the server every couple weeks, good luck. Its not gonna happen, and it doesnt make any sense. Its not rational from a financial perspective. So AI is widening the gap for Toast versus its competitors.Sean Barrett

Time-sensitive because tied to current weekly model-release cadence.

Principle

Product-plus-profits — sustaining high growth and high margins together — is rare and hard to replicate

The rare, durable businesses grow fast AND stay highly profitable at the same time.

Counter Global's "product and profits" lens: Toast delivered 97th-percentile gross-profit growth while moving margins from -16% to ~35%, a combination few companies achieve.

Growth and profitability together is the signal of a truly durable compounder.

companies that can lead with innovation, lead with product-led growth, but also do it with really high profitability. There arent that many companies in the world that can do that, that can sustain really high growth with great profitability at the same time.Sean Barrett

Counter Global's core screening lens.

Principle

Consumption-based pricing aligned to the customer makes gross profit reoccurring without contracts

Payments-based take-rate monetization is reoccurring because your revenue rides the customer's revenue.

Two-thirds of Toast's gross profit is payments take-rate; it is more volatile than contract SaaS but reoccurs because customers cannot operate without it and it grows with their sales.

Tie monetization to the customer's transactions and revenue reoccurs by default.

they also grow with inflation, they grow with GDP, and its really aligned with the customer, where their revenue becomes your revenue as well.Sean Barrett

Clarifies the recurring vs reoccurring distinction.

Principle

Multi-tenant SaaS compounds into a data-and-deployment advantage single-tenant rivals cannot close

Multi-tenant architecture turns a large installed base into a real-time data and deployment flywheel.

Toast codes once and deploys new AI models across 160,000 restaurants simultaneously, seeing local data everywhere — a compounding advantage the analyst frames as widening over time.

Architecture choice compounds: multi-tenant widens the gap the bigger you get.

with multi-tenant SaaS, you can see all the data in real time, you can give product updates in real time, and then the gap against your competitors gets much wider.Sean Barrett

Pairs with the AI-widens-the-gap signal.

Frameworks

Reusable systems and operating models — including when they help and when they break.

Framework

The five-variable Toast model: location count, payments ARPU, SaaS ARPU, margins, multiple

Model the whole business off five predictable levers: locations, payments ARPU, SaaS ARPU, margins, multiple.

Barrett underwrites Toast by building each TAM from these five variables; because they have been historically predictable, doubling locations plus ARPU growth compounds into a 4x-8x outcome.

Reduce a platform to its handful of predictable value drivers to underwrite it.

you look at the five things that matter here. Its location count, payments, SaaS ARPU, margins, and multiple. All of those things historically have been pretty relatively predictable.Sean Barrett

Replicable valuation build; explicit driver list.

Framework

Three-way valuation triangulation: GAAP multiple, ten-year MOIC/TAM build, and DCF

Triangulate intrinsic value three ways: forward multiple, ten-year MOIC via TAM build, and DCF.

Barrett values Toast at 18x 2027 GAAP earnings, a 4x-10x ten-year MOIC as gross profit goes $2B to $10B, and a DCF fair value of ~$50 vs a ~$22-23 price.

Triangulate value from multiple, MOIC and DCF rather than trusting one method.

There are three ways that we look at valuation here. It all is in an effort to get back to intrinsic value.Sean Barrett

Time-sensitive: specific price levels quoted.

Framework

The "laws of physics" moat checklist (Munger mental models) for durable software

Audit durability against a fixed checklist: mission-criticality, network effects, standardization, data advantage, domain expertise.

Counter Global's "laws of physics" apply Munger's mental models as a five-point moat diagnostic; Barrett argues Toast checks every box, plus the two under-discussed structural moats of hardware and distribution.

Run durability as a checklist audit, not a story.

we always come back to what we call the laws of physics here at Counter Global. Charlie Munger used to call them his mental models... Toast is a mission-critical operating system. They have strong network effects. The industry is standardizing on this platform. They have huge data advantages. They have domain expertise.Sean Barrett

Named, replicable diagnostic with a clear pass/fail structure.

Framework

Three-pillar management evaluation: integrity, ambition, innovation

Evaluate management on three explicit pillars: integrity, ambition, and innovation.

Barrett assesses Toast's founder-led MIT computer-science team against integrity (they tell it like it is), ambition (path from 20k to 400k restaurants), and innovation (AI-native roadmap).

Judge teams on a fixed rubric, not a vibe.

At Counter, we evaluate our management teams on three pillars. We talk about this a lot. Its integrity, ambition, and innovation.Sean Barrett

Named, transferable management-diligence framework.

Signals

What appears to be shifting, for whom it matters, and what happens if you ignore it.

Signal

Toast Grow is driving ~8% revenue uplift at 20x ROI and could be the next leg of revenue

Toast Grow's ~8% revenue uplift at 20x ROI signals a new high-ARPU revenue leg.

Just launched, Toast Grow automates local restaurant marketing (SMS, deals, Instagram) using historical and neighbor data, delivering an early ~8% revenue uplift and potential doubling of SaaS ARPU.

Watch ROI-positive agentic modules as the next monetization vector.

theyve seen an eight percent uplift in total revenue... this product that costs $500 a month as a SaaS module, by the way, nice uplift, could be 100% uplift to SaaS ARPU, gives you about a 20X ROI right out the gate.Sean Barrett

Quantified, forward-looking, named time frame (just launched).

Signal

DoorDash is piloting POS in response to Toast's free delivery — an innovator's dilemma unfolding

DoorDash is trapped by its own delivery take-rate as Toast attacks with free delivery.

Barrett flags DoorDash's POS pilots as a defensive response to Toast's free-delivery move; DoorDash's ~15% delivery take rate makes a symmetric counter self-cannibalizing.

A high-margin incumbent line becomes a liability when a challenger gives it away.

One player to watch right now is DoorDash. Its no secret DoorDash has been out piloting POS solutions with their customers, but I think maybe they did that in response to Toast, which very famously about a year ago started offering free delivery. Thats a real innovators dilemma for DoorDash all of a sudden.Sean Barrett

Forward-looking competitive dynamic to monitor.

Signal

AI is the best thing to happen to Toast since founding — the moat gap is widening now

AI is a moat-widener for Toast, not a threat — its data and deployment lead compounds with every model.

Barrett's forward call: the current AI wave strengthens Toast most of all because its data advantage and instant deployment let it capture each model release across the base.

Ask whether AI compounds or commoditizes a given company's advantage.

AI is the best thing to happen to Toast since their founding probably. Product has always had advantages versus the incumbents and versus the competitors. But you fast-forward to today, the product has substantial data advantagesSean Barrett

Forward-looking signal; central thesis claim.

Opportunities

Only included where there is a buyer, a real wedge, and a plausible revenue path — not vague idea theater.

Opportunity

Five new TAMs beyond core restaurants, mostly served by legacy tech, make the US TAM bigger than restaurants

Toast's platform unlocks five adjacent TAMs mostly held by legacy tech, a 15M-location global opportunity.

Toast has built and is now in-market with grocery/liquor/gas, hospitality (Marriott win) and enterprise (Applebee's), plus international — turning a single-TAM SMB business into a 15M-location global opportunity.

A proven vertical OS can port into adjacent legacy-served markets.

now the TAM in the US is actually bigger than the restaurant market. Its enterprise SMB plus grocery plus hospitality... Even if you take out China, they have a 15 million location TAM globally, most of which is served by legacy technologySean Barrett

Unfilled market gap with explicit TAM logic.

Opportunity

International is a greenfield growing faster than Toast's early US ramp

Toast's international markets are ramping faster than its early US did — a fresh greenfield.

Live in UK, Ireland, Canada and Australia, Toast's international business is reportedly growing faster than its early US ramp; Barrett saw Toast "all over the place" walking into random London restaurants.

A validated domestic playbook can compound faster in fresh geographies.

they quietly built an international business where theyre in the market in UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia. Management would tell you that those markets are growing faster than Toast grew in the US when they started here.Sean Barrett

Second, distinct TAM-expansion vector.

Lessons still worth keeping

Useful takeaways that did not fully clear the bar for durable principle status.

Lesson

An AI-native startup that thought it could clone Toast pushed its roadmap out two more years

A well-funded AI-native challenger underestimated the physical moats and slipped its roadmap two years.

The startup assumed AI coding would let it copy Toast's product quickly; instead it isn't visible in the market and pushed its comparable-product date out at least two years — with supply chain and distribution still ahead.

Cloning software is easy; cloning the physical moat is not.

a high-profile startup launched. Its supposed to be AI native, serving the restaurant space... Fast-forward to today, we arent seeing them at all in the market. Last I heard, they extended their roadmap. They think its gonna be at least another two years before they have something that looks like Toast.Sean Barrett

Concrete competitor outcome; ties software-easy vs moat-hard.

Lesson

Competitors who took the iPad shortcut couldn't gain share and some hit their demise

Rivals who shipped iPad apps to skip hardware couldn't gain share and some died.

A specific competitive outcome: multiple Toast rivals chose the app-on-iPad shortcut, the hardware failed in restaurant conditions, and they either couldn't gain share or hit their demise.

Shortcutting the hard physical build can be terminal in operating environments.

a lot of the competitors that came out over the years tried to leapfrog them and take the easy road, which was building an app and then asking their customers to just download the app on an iPad. Turns out iPads dont work very well in restaurants.Sean Barrett

Specific incident with named failure outcome.

Lesson

The 2015 open-source-on-AWS scare crushed software multiples, then category killers went parabolic 18 months later

History rhymes: a "software is free now" panic compressed multiples in 2015, then winners went parabolic within ~18 months.

Barrett uses the 2014-2016 episode — open source hitting AWS, multiples collapsing to 3-4x revenue, then category killers going parabolic — as the analog for today's SaaS-apocalypse fear.

Panics about "free" tech historically create the buying window in category killers.

It took about 18 months, and when you fast-forward to early 2016, the category killers kept putting up numbers. They kept innovating. Some of them were using open source internally, most of them were, and the stocks went parabolic.Sean Barrett

Historical precedent anchoring the SaaS-apocalypse rebuttal.

The Plays

Try these this week

Verb-first executable actions — each one tied to a stated outcome in the episode.

Embed agentic AI in a system of action so customers do real work by conversation

Outcome: Pair conversational AI with a system of action so users execute, not just query.

Context: Toast IQ lets owners make cross-location menu and price changes conversationally and auto-reorders produce from Instacart when stock runs low; ~50% of customers use it weekly.

its effectively a conversational AI offering that combines it with a system of action. So you can talk to your Toast IQ. You can ask it questions. You can make menu changes across the board. That sounds simple, but if you have multiple locations and you wanna change prices or change menu items... that used to take an owner all weekend. Now you can just talk to your Toast IQ and make it in real time.
Sean Barrett
real-time actions replacing all-weekend tasks per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

  7. 7

Before you start

  • · Multi-tenant real-time data
  • · Write-access system of action
  • · Non-technical-friendly conversational UX
vertical-saasaigrowthscale

Run boots-on-the-ground channel checks to test the switching hypothesis

Outcome: Test a competitive thesis by physically surveying dozens of real, dual-enabled customers in the field.

Context: Counter Global sent a colleague into 30-40 San Francisco restaurants running both Toast and DoorDash and asked whether they'd switch to a free DoorDash POS; none would — validating Toast's stickiness beyond the model.

my colleague actually went up to San Francisco the other day, just this week, and walked into 30 or 40 restaurants that have DoorDash and Toast enabled, bought something — be a good customer — but asked them, How likely would you be to switch from Toast to DoorDash if it was free? We couldnt find a single customer that said they would switch
Sean Barrett
a single field trip; repeated over time per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

  7. 7

Before you start

  • · Locations with both products enabled
  • · Willingness to do in-person primary research
investingdiligencegrowthscale

Sequence TAM expansion: win the core to a flywheel, then reinvest into adjacent verticals

Outcome: Dominate the core to a flywheel, then port the platform into adjacent legacy verticals in sequence.

Context: Toast drove core SMB restaurants to flywheel share, then sequenced into enterprise, grocery/liquor/gas, hospitality and international — each built on the core platform and entered once the prior TAM was compounding.

The beauty of the Toast story is how theyve sequenced their growth into new TAMs and opened up new TAMs over time. We talked about the core SMB as the primary driver of the business many years ago.
Sean Barrett
sequenced over 5-6 years per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

  7. 7

Before you start

  • · A flywheeling core segment
  • · A reusable platform
  • · Bottoms-up per-TAM underwriting
vertical-saasgrowthscale

Build purpose-built hardware as a loss leader to lock in the moat

Outcome: Sell hard-to-build hardware at a loss to lower adoption friction and lock in a supply-chain moat.

Context: Toast charges only a nominal hardware fee despite the complex engineering (water/liquid/heat/drop resistance) across kitchen display systems and Toast Go handhelds — using hardware as a loss-leading entry wedge that competitors can't cheaply match.

Hardware is a loss leader, so they do charge a nominal fee for their hardware when a customer starts up the business... it has to be pretty advanced, so it can deal with water, liquids, dropping, making sure it doesnt break. Its actually a complex engineering feat to build this kind of hardware.
Sean Barrett
multi-year build per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

Before you start

  • · Hardware engineering capability
  • · Supply-chain and inventory management
  • · Alternative monetization on payments and SaaS
vertical-saashardwaregrowthscale

Ship an ROI-priced automated marketing engine as a high-ARPU module

Outcome: Automate the customer's marketing off your data and price the module to its ROI, not your cost.

Context: Toast Grow predicts slow nights (e.g. a quiet winter Tuesday in Boston), auto-runs promotions, and delivered an early ~8% revenue uplift for $500/month — a ~20x ROI and potential doubling of SaaS ARPU.

What Toast Grow does is look ahead. It takes data from the past, and it takes data from restaurants around you... Lets go out and do a local promo with SMS texting to people who have been here before. Lets put up deals on the website. Lets do an Instagram promotion. It does it all in real time automatically, and it does that for about $500 a month.
Sean Barrett
real-time, ongoing per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

  7. 7

Before you start

  • · Historical and cross-tenant data
  • · Automated multi-channel marketing execution
  • · ROI measurement
vertical-saasaigrowthscale

Flip the platform-tax incumbent by giving away its high-margin line

Outcome: Attack a platform tax by giving away the incumbent's high-margin service and monetizing on your own base.

Context: Toast introduced free delivery via an Uber Eats partnership; ~80,000 restaurants (half its base) adopted the ordering module, and a $40 DoorDash order can cost $30-35 through Toast — a move DoorDash cannot symmetrically match.

Toast just flipped that whole thing on its head. We think 80,000 customers, or half of the Toast restaurant base now, has signed up for the Toast ordering module, which effectively gives you free delivery in partnership with Uber Eats from the restaurant perspective.
Sean Barrett
~1 year from launch per
  1. 1

  2. 2

  3. 3

  4. 4

  5. 5

  6. 6

  7. 7

Before you start

  • · A large installed base with trust
  • · An alternative primary monetization line
  • · A fulfillment partner
vertical-saasfintechgrowthscale

Decision Moments

Actual decisions, real outcomes

Specific decisions narrated in the episode with their outcomes and transferable lessons.

Early on, POS entrants had to choose how to deliver software to restaurants: ship an app on off-the-shelf iPads (fast, cheap) or build purpose-built restaurant hardware (slow, capital-intensive, hard).

Did: Toast committed years ago to designing and manufacturing purpose-built, ruggedized hardware — kitchen display systems, Toast Go handhelds, payment devices engineered for water, liquid, heat and drops — and built the supply chain behind it, selling it as a loss leader.Outcome: Toast became the first successful scaled cloud-based POS disruptor with elite NPS (~50) and seven-module attach, while iPad-shortcut competitors saw devices break in the field, couldn't gain share, and some hit their demise.

In physical operating environments, the hard-to-build hardware is the moat; the convenient software shortcut fails against real-world conditions.

Part of an emerging decision pattern across multiple episodes

Restaurants were paying DoorDash a ~15% delivery take rate (up to ~30% all-in) and resented delivery fees. Toast had to decide whether to compete inside DoorDash's model or attack it.

Did: About a year before the interview, Toast introduced free delivery through an Uber Eats partnership via its ordering module, giving restaurants effectively free delivery and undercutting the DoorDash economics.Outcome: Roughly 80,000 restaurants — about half the Toast base — attached the ordering module; a $40 DoorDash order costs ~$30-35 via Toast, and DoorDash, whose ~15% take rate it would have to cannibalize, was pushed into an innovator's dilemma and began piloting its own POS.

Giving away the incumbent's high-margin service traps the incumbent: matching you cannibalizes their core, while you monetize on payments and SaaS.

Part of an emerging decision pattern across multiple episodes

Tensions surfaced

Contradictions and trade-offs the episode raises — judgment calls a thoughtful operator has to navigate.

Tension

As the challenger becomes the market, will its churn converge to the industry average?

Either Toast's low churn reverts as it becomes the market, or its profitability edge keeps its base surviving.

A live debate since 2019-2020: skeptics expect churn to rise as Toast approaches 30-40% share, but no noticeable change has appeared because Toast customers are more profitable and survive more.

Resolution rests on whether the edge is selection or causation — here, causation via customer profitability.

the big debate or the big question is, so what happens in five years when Toast is 30, 40% of the overall market? Do they look more like the market, and does their churn go up? Thats been a debate since 2020, 2019. As they get bigger, surely their churn will go up. We havent seen noticeable changes in churn.Sean Barrett

Second meaningful tension; forward-testable.

Tension

SaaS-apocalypse vs category killers thriving because of AI

Software is being disrupted AND vertical category killers are thriving — the market wrongly prices them the same.

The productive tension: the SaaS-apocalypse is real for some software but the market applies it indiscriminately, creating (per Barrett) a generational buying window in category killers like Toast.

Resolve by moat structure: disruption hits the cloneable, tailwinds favor the fortified specialist.

theres been a pretty severe debate in public markets around the SaaSpocalypse, SaaS is dead narrative. While we think there is a lot of disruption out there in the software space, particularly around coding and DevOps in some cases, there are also a handful of category killers, vertical market winners, and infrastructure software companies that are thrivingSean Barrett

The episode's central productive tension.

Corpus connection

Where this episode fits for retrieval

What kinds of decisions this briefing is best pulled into.

Primary decisions

  • strategic-bet
  • competitive-positioning
  • product-strategy