Two Product-Market Fits
A marketplace must pass the disappointment test independently on each side.
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 3
- Confidence
- 88%
Lauzier's hot take is that product-market fit is independent of marketplace dynamics — you measure it the conventional way, but you measure it twice, once per side. A marketplace can have a compelling value proposition for buyers and a broken one for sellers (margins too high, earnings too low) and still look healthy on aggregate metrics until supply quietly leaves.
Origin
Lauzier's synthesis; the underlying measurement instrument is Sean Ellis's 'how disappointed would you be if this product went away' survey, which he explicitly endorses as the classic test. Lauzier's contribution is running it as two separate tests, one per marketplace side.
Core principles
- 01PMF is orthogonal to liquidity — you can have a beloved product and still have no supply flywheel.
- 02Each side is effectively a different company with a different value proposition and a different channel.
- 03Demand-side PMF often arrives first and masks a supply-side value proposition that is not compelling enough.
- 04Measure PMF with conventional tools; do not invent marketplace-specific PMF metrics.
How to run it
- 1
Run the disappointment survey on the demand side
Ask demand-side users what percentage would be significantly disappointed, or have no other solution, if the product were taken away. Treat the answer as your demand-side PMF reading.
Pro tip Pair the score with the 'no other solution' question — it exposes whether you are a convenience or a necessity.
- 2
Run the same survey, separately, on the supply side
Ask suppliers the identical question. This is the step most teams skip, because supply is treated as inventory rather than as users.
Pro tip Probe economics explicitly — take rate and margin are the usual reasons supply-side PMF fails while demand-side PMF passes.
Watch out A passing demand score with a failing supply score is a marketplace on borrowed time, not a marketplace with PMF.
- 3
Diagnose the gap before touching marketplace mechanics
If one side fails, fix that side's value proposition (economics, tooling, status, earnings stability) rather than trying to engineer liquidity around a value proposition that does not hold.
Pro tip Product-channel fit for the failing side is a separate problem from its value proposition — name which one is broken.
In the wild
Lauzier describes the common pattern where a marketplace finds strong fit on the demand side, then realises the proposition is not compelling enough for suppliers because the take rate leaves margins too thin. The marketplace looks like it is working right up until suppliers churn.
→ Teams that measure only aggregate metrics discover the missing supply-side PMF too late, after network effects have started decaying.
Common mistakes
Treating suppliers as inventory rather than users
If you never survey supply, you never learn whether they would miss you. Sellers are people too and they will quietly leave, and marketplaces are laggy enough that you find out long after the damage is done.
Inventing marketplace-specific PMF metrics
PMF measurement is independent of marketplace dynamics. Bolting liquidity ratios onto a PMF question conflates two different diagnoses and delays the fix.
Is it for you?
Best for
Marketplace founders and product leaders who suspect one side of their business is being neglected.
Not ideal for
Single-sided SaaS or e-commerce businesses where there is only one customer to satisfy.
From the transcript
“have two product Market fits essentially you want to make sure that you have like a compelling enough value proposition on both sides of the…”
“you know like uh what percentage of users uh you know would be like significantly uh you know disappointed or have no other solution right”
From the episode
How marketplaces win: Liquidity, growth levers, quality, and more
Benjamin Lauzier (Lyft, Thumbtack, Reforge)