I’ve built a go-to-market machine that works beautifully in Russia. But I’m starting to realize that just adapting it for the US might be a recipe for wasting time and money. The channels are different, the messaging is different, the decision-making process is different, the regulatory environment is different—basically everything is different.
The question I keep wrestling with is: are there any parts of the Russian playbook that are actually universal, or should I be treating the US expansion like a completely new company?
I know that can’t be 100% true—there has to be some transferable thinking. But I also can’t afford to spend six months copying and pasting my Russia strategy into a US version and then realizing it doesn’t work at all.
I’ve heard that some founders on this platform have gone through exactly this—figuring out what to keep, what to adapt, and what to completely throw out. I’m wondering: when you look back at your Russian GTM playbook entering a Western market, what tactics actually translated and what completely fell apart? How do you decide what’s worth testing versus what you should just kill immediately?
This is such a great question, and honestly, the answer is more nuanced than “keep this, throw out that.”
From what I’ve seen in our community, the principles of what you built in Russia often translate, but the tactics almost never do. Like, if your Russia strategy was built on deep creator relationships and authentic storytelling, that principle translates everywhere. But the specific creators, channels, and messaging? Completely different.
I think the best approach is to separate your playbook into three buckets: (1) Core principles (these stay), (2) Tactics (these get redone), (3) Channels (these definitely change).
Then, get people from the US market to stress-test that for you. I’d actually be happy to connect you with someone who’s done exactly this transition successfully. They can walk you through what they kept and what they completely redid.
From a metrics perspective, I’ve tracked what transfers and what doesn’t, and here’s the pattern:
What tends to translate (60-70% effectiveness):
- Your core positioning logic (if it’s based on customer insights, not just Russian market specifics)
- Your customer segmentation approach
- Your analytics infrastructure (Google Analytics, Mixpanel, etc. work the same way)
- Your content production workflow (the process is similar, just different output)
What almost never translates (10-20% effectiveness):
- Specific channels (VK, Yandex, Telegram don’t exist / don’t work the same in the US)
- Pricing strategy (what works in Russia rarely works in the US)
- Influencer selection (followers ≠ followers, engagement patterns are different)
- Regulatory/compliance approach (FTC guidelines are different from Russian regulations)
What needs complete rethinking (needs 80%+ redesign):
- Partner strategy
- Distribution channels
- Creator compensation models
- Messaging tone and angles
My recommendation: ask yourself, “Why does this work in Russia?” If the answer is “because of Russia,” kill it. If the answer is “because customers need X,” test it in the US.
I’d actually recommend doing an audit where you map each tactic to the underlying principle. That’s your transfer guide.
Can you articulate the top 3-5 reasons your Russian GTM works? That’s where you start.
We made this mistake. We spent three months adapting our Russia playbook for Europe, thinking we could just swap channels and messaging. Waste of time.
Here’s what we actually learned:
Kept: Our insight about what problem we solve. That was solid and actually resonated in Europe too.
Completely redid: Everything about how we go to market. Different platforms, different creator expectations, different pitch.
Almost threw out but tweaked: Our partnership approach. The principle (partner-driven distribution) was right, but the actual partners, terms, negotiation style—all different.
The real lesson is this: don’t start by adapting. Start by understanding the US market independently. Then, after you understand it, look back at Russia and ask, “Is there anything here that’s actually relevant?” Usually it’s less than 20%.
We did this backwards at first and wasted months. Then we hired a US consultant for like six weeks, really dug into the market, and then looked back at our Russia playbook with fresh eyes. That’s when we realized what was actually universal and what was just Russia-specific luck.
How much have you actually learned about the US market independently yet, separate from thinking about your Russia playbook?
Here’s the brutal truth I tell all my founder clients: you’re not a Russian founder expanding to the US. You’re a founder entering a completely new market that happens to be the US. Treat it that way.
The Russian playbook is your competitive moat in one thing: you understand how to think differently about markets. That’s it. Everything else needs to be rebuilt.
But here’s where I see founders get it right: they take the meta-principles from Russia and apply them freshly to the US market. Like, if your Russia strategy was built on community-driven distribution, the principle is solid. But the actual communities, platforms, and activation methods in the US are completely different.
I’d recommend this approach:
-
Audit your Russia playbook - Map each tactic to the underlying hypothesis. “We use Telegram because creators are active there” vs. “We build community-driven distribution.”
-
Forget Russia for 6 weeks - Pretend Russia doesn’t exist. Learn the US market fresh. Who are the actual distribution channels? What platforms matter? Who influences buying decisions?
-
Compare and contrast - Now look at Russia with fresh US market knowledge. What’s actually universal? Probably 10-20% of your playbook.
-
Test the transferable 20% - Start small with the things that might transfer. Cheap, fast experiments, not full-scale rollout.
What percentage of your Russia revenue comes from tactics that are specific to Russian platforms vs. principles that could work anywhere?
This is a classic “core vs. context” problem in strategy.
Your core—the fundamental insight about customer needs you’re solving—might be universal. Your context—the market structure, channels, and tactics—is definitely different.
Let me give you a framework:
Keep from your Russia playbook:
- Your core customer insight (why you exist)
- Your unit economics logic (if it’s based on real margins, not just Russian market luck)
- Your segmentation approach (assuming it’s based on need, not geography)
- Your product philosophy
Completely rebuild:
- Go-to-market channels
- Partner strategy
- Influencer/creator selection
- Messaging and positioning
- Pricing
Selectively test:
- Customer acquisition mechanisms (if they worked in Russia for non-Russia-specific reasons)
- Partnership models (principle might transfer, execution won’t)
- Content strategies (approach might work, actual content definitely changes)
Here’s what I’d actually do: spend 2-3 weeks interviewing 10-15 US customers and prospects independently, without thinking about Russia. Map out what you learn.
Then, map your Russia playbook onto that US market reality and score each element from “highly transferable” to “complete waste of time.”
The honest assessment is usually: 10-15% is worth testing, 70% needs to be rebuilt, 15% should be completely discarded.
What’s one assumption from your Russia playbook that you’re most confident is actually universal vs. most likely to be Russia-specific?