Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Era of the PM is Over, The Era of the Producer is Coming•
How SaaS Services Raise Prices•
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
How ICP and PMF End Up Killing Real Business•
Go To Market 101 in 1 Hour•
Why So Many Startups Talk About GTM•
Go To Market: How to Bridge the Gap Between Market and Data•
The Glass Slipper Is Not for Sale: Rethinking Retention, GTM, and the Myth of Early AI Magic•
OBF
KR
AboutWhy OBFInsightServicesContact Us
Back to Insights
Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase

Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase

6 min read

“We are preparing to enter the Asia market.” “We are targeting the global market.”

When we hear these phrases, we tend to interpret them in a very specific way:

No meaningful decisions have been made yet.

This is not criticism. It is an observation—one repeatedly confirmed in the field.

Phrases like “the Asian market,” “the European market,” or “the global market” sound like strategic declarations. In reality, they are often admissions that the hard questions have been postponed.

This article is not a GTM framework. It is not a market entry guide. And it is not a collection of success stories.

Its purpose is singular: to dismantle the flawed mental model that causes market strategies to fail before they even begin.

⸻

A Country Is an Administrative Unit. A Market Is a Behavioral One.

Countries are divided by laws and institutions. Markets are divided by human behavior and decision-making patterns.

The moment these two are conflated, strategy begins to collapse into abstraction. • Sharing a passport does not mean sharing the same problem. • Speaking the same language does not mean making the same purchasing decisions. • Using the same currency does not imply the same price sensitivity.

Yet we casually say:

“In the U.S. market…” “In the Korean market…”

There is no such thing as a single “U.S. market.”

What exists are people in specific cities, industries, and roles, responding to problems in specific contexts—and repeating certain behaviors as a result.

Markets are not geographic labels. They are patterns of action.

⸻

Same Language, Same Currency — Still Not a Market

The United States uses English and the U.S. dollar. This creates the illusion of a unified market.

That illusion only holds on a map.

A mid-level finance manager in New York and a small business owner in suburban Texas may speak the same language, but they belong to entirely different markets. • Their decision-making structures differ • Their tolerance for risk differs • Their definition of a “reasonable price” differs • Even the role software plays in their work differs

Terms like “East Coast” or “West Coast” markets are, in practice, still dangerously coarse.

Even within New York alone— Wall Street, Brooklyn startups, immigrant communities in Queens, and enterprise headquarters in Manhattan all demand fundamentally different strategies.

The moment these realities are flattened into one “market,” strategy turns into hope.

⸻

If Korea Isn’t One Market, Why Do We Pretend Others Are?

Here is the irony.

When discussing domestic markets, companies are rarely this naïve.

They naturally distinguish between: • Metropolitan areas and regional cities • Large enterprises and SMEs • Industry-specific decision cycles • Organizational culture and budget authority

But once a border is crossed, thinking suddenly becomes simplistic.

“Because it’s the U.S.” “Because it’s global.”

This is not analysis. It is a signal that thinking has stopped.

⸻

The Most Common Fallacy: Translation Equals Localization

Many companies begin global expansion in the same way: 1. Translate the website 2. Translate the product UI 3. Translate marketing copy

Then they conclude:

“We localized everything, but there’s no traction.”

This outcome should not be surprising.

Translation improves accessibility. It does not make strategic decisions for you.

True localization begins with harder questions: • What must we deliberately abandon in this market? • Is this problem actually painful here? • Why do we assume this price will be accepted?

Teams that start with translation almost always share the same failure pattern:

They change the language, without changing the choice.

⸻

Bringing Beef Stew to India

It may sound uncomfortable, but the analogy is precise.

Many teams take what sold well in their home market, translate it into English, and bring it unchanged into a completely different cultural context.

When it fails, they say:

“The market is strange.” “The culture is too different.”

In most cases, the market is fine. The menu is wrong.

Culture is rarely the problem. The absence of a clear decision about what to sell is.

⸻

“Global Is Hard Because of Language” — What That Really Means

When teams say, “Global expansion is hard because of language,” it usually means:

We haven’t decided where to focus.

Language is not the barrier. Cultural critique is simply the easiest excuse for insufficient preparation.

⸻

How Teams That Actually Succeed Begin

Teams that produce real outcomes never start with “countries.”

They start with: • Cities • Problems • Roles • Situations

And they follow a consistent pattern: • They don’t lead with the word “global” • They run multiple small local experiments • They scale only what survives • They abandon failed hypotheses quickly

Global expansion is not a goal. It is the accumulation of proven results.

⸻

In Practice, There Are Only Two Viable Paths

After observing countless failed attempts, the options are surprisingly limited.

Option One Break markets like the U.S. or Europe into real units—by culture, city, industry, and role—and enter with full intent and precision.

This is not “global expansion.” It is multi-local market entry, and it demands time, capital, and high cognitive discipline.

Option Two Prove success first in structurally clear markets like Korea or Japan. • Single language • High cultural cohesion • Fast feedback loops • Clean reference cases

Then use that success as an anchor to expand outward.

Everything else usually ends the same way:

“We translated everything, but nothing happened.”

⸻

Translation Is Not Globalization

Let’s be explicit. • Language translation is accessibility • Payment localization is accessibility • Local hiring is accessibility

These are entry conditions, not strategies.

Saying you have “entered” a market explains nothing. It simply means you are now eligible to run experiments.

⸻

Conclusion

Markets do not fail because they are complex. They fail because we insist on oversimplifying them.

“The U.S. market” and “the European market” are often just placeholders for decisions that were never made.

This is why we always begin with the same questions: • Which city? • Which industry? • Which role? • In what situation?

If these questions cannot be answered, there is no market yet.

⸻

The OBF Perspective

Oswarld Boutique Consulting Firm does not help companies “translate for global expansion.” And we do not treat country names as strategies.

What we do is simple and difficult: • Break markets down into units that actually function • Select entry points where success is realistically achievable • Verify whether those successes can scale

Global expansion is not about where you go. It is about where you have already proven something works.

And our role is to make that proof happen faster, with less risk, and with fewer illusions.

Why ‘The Global Market’ Is an Irresponsible Phrase | Oswarld Boutique Firm