Post on Medial

1) Tier-2 & Tier - 3 people are fighting for the ideologies anx they make purchases on that bases.

Starting in Tier 1 cities is like getting your fancy tech product tested in a high-end lab before rolling it out to the masses. It’s all about making sure it works before everyone’s eyes are on it. Nahi toh Ola Scooter jaise fire product but in the wrong way.

Focusing only on Tier 1 cities can lead to missed opportunities in larger untapped markets, and it may also create unnecessary barriers for startups trying to address broader needs.

Targeting Tier 1 cities first makes sense due to higher disposable income and market readiness, which helps startups refine their models before scaling to Tier 2 and 3.

The focus on Tire 1 cities is largely due to the business ecosystem and investor mindset. High-value customers, better infrastructure, and more reliable data make these cities attractive. It’s like why a new fashion brand would target Mumbai or Bangalore first—higher visibility, better press coverage, and quicker feedback. Tire 2 and 3 cities are often seen as secondary markets that require more effort and time to develop

It's simple. Lazy service=tier1, agriculture services=tier2/3

Most startups go for Tire 1 cities first because they offer immediate market validation and attract investors. It’s like how Bollywood films often debut in major cities before hitting smaller towns. Investors prefer markets where they can see quicker returns and measurable success. The problem with Tire 2 and 3 cities is that the user base might be large, but the purchasing power and infrastructure aren’t as robust, making it a tougher nut to crack.

Tire 1 cities get all the startup love because they’re the low-hanging fruit—higher incomes, better infrastructure, and a more developed market. Investors see these cities as safer bets with quicker returns. It’s like starting a new restaurant in Mumbai or Delhi; you know you’ll get more footfall and feedback faster. Tire 2 and 3 cities, while full of potential, are seen as riskier and more challenging to crack due to less developed infrastructure and lower purchasing power