Abstract symbolic illustration for Tapmad Wallet/Billing Migration: 50% to 1% — Product Strategy, brand-cyan editorial composition on dark canvas
← Product Work
◆ Product Strategy

Tapmad Wallet/Billing Migration: 50% to 1%

Migrated subscription billing off high-cost rails and rebuilt wallet/DCB flows, payment cost from 50% to 1%.

50% → 1%
Payment cost
5M+
Paid subscribers
+70%
ARPU
$10M+
ARR
◆ Executive summary

What this is, in one paragraph.

Diagnosed unit economics as a payments problem, not a pricing problem. Rebuilt rail mix, retries and dunning around wallet/DCB economics, pulled payment cost from ~50% to ~1% of revenue while scaling to 5M+ paid subscribers.

◆ Before / after
Payment cost / revenue
~50%->~1%
Paid subscribers
~0->5M+
ARPU
Baseline->+70%
◆ Diagramfig.
Billing rail migration: from one expensive rail to a portfolio.
RAILSUNIFIED PLATFORMCONSUMERSCardsMPGS · MDESWalletsJazzCash · EasypaisaDCBDirect carrier billingIBFT1Link · NIFTBank transfersRTGS · ACHCross-borderDLocal · Thunes · Boku · CodaUnified APIPay-in · PayoutRouting engineCost · success · healthRisk servicePre-auth · post-auth · asyncCanonical ledgerDouble-entry · idempotentSettlement engineMulti-rail · corridor-awareMerchantsConsole · WebhooksFinanceT+0 / T+1 settlementRegulatorReporting pipeline

Subscriber cohorts route across DCB, wallets and cards by cost, success and lifecycle. Retry orchestration and dunning are platform services, not per-rail glue, payment cost fell from ~50% to ~1%.

◆ Problem

The job to be done.

Tapmad's subscription business was being eaten alive by payment cost, operator and aggregator margins consumed up to half of revenue, capping growth and ARPU.

◆ What I built

What I shipped.

  • Re-architected billing to prefer wallet, DCB and direct bank rails
  • Smart retry and dunning flows tuned per rail and per cohort
  • Pricing and packaging changes aligned to rail economics
  • Reconciliation against operator settlements to recover leakage
◆ Architecture

How it's put together.

  • Rail preference engine per subscriber state and prior failure history
  • Per-rail retry curves instead of a single global retry policy
◆ My role

Where I sat in the work.

Drove the payments product strategy, vendor renegotiation and the cross-functional migration with growth, finance and engineering.

◆ Impact

What moved.

  • Reduced payment cost from ~50% to ~1% of revenue
  • Scaled to 5M+ paid subscribers
  • Increased ARPU by 70%
◆ Lessons

What I'd take into the next build.

  • Payment cost is a product variable, not a procurement one.
  • Retries and dunning are growth levers when rail economics are understood.
◆ Why it matters

Relevance to networks, PSPs and cross-border platforms.

The transferable core: treating payment cost as a product variable, rebuilding rail mix, retries and dunning around wallet and DCB economics. Every subscription, marketplace and creator platform hits this wall eventually, inside every network, PSP and cross-border platform; only the logo changes.

Discussing payment infrastructure / product leadership roles?

Reference-available. Download the résumé or get in touch.