← Back to experiences
[ OK ] Loaded —
[ INFO ]
$ cd
$ ls -lt
01
02
03
04
05
$ ls -lt
01
02
03
04
05
user@intervues:~/experiences/…$
Level: Senior-Level
Round: Full Journey · Type: Multiple Types · Difficulty: 6/10 · Duration: 270 min · Interviewer: Neutral
Topics: Product Management, Product Sense, Product Strategy, A/B Testing, Stakeholder Management, Low-code/No-code Website Builders, Profitability Analysis, Integration vs Build, Customer Segmentation, Financial Modeling, Credit Card Partnerships, Engagement Metrics, Product Discovery, Problem Definition, Solutioning, Storyboarding, Technical Product Deep Dive, Trade-offs
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Interview date: 2025-06-06
Question: Initial call with the recruiter to discuss the role and my background.
Question: Product casing focused on Capital One Shopping. I was asked about revenue streams, areas for improvement, testing strategies (A/B testing), and UX design critiques of email styles.
Question: Deep dive into a tech product/feature I previously led, using the STAR method. The interviewer focused on trade-offs, lessons learned, and stakeholder interactions.
Question: Case study involving a low-code/no-code website builder targeting restaurants. I had to identify target customer segments, revenue models, calculate 2-year profitability, evaluate integration options, and make recommendations based on exhibits.
Question: Case study about a credit card partnership with Uber, focusing on increasing engagement to drive spend. I had to analyze customer segments, assess profitability, and make recommendations.
Question: DMV improvement case. I was asked to identify problems, define a problem statement, solution, storyboard, and present recommendations to management.
This was a standard recruiter call.
The interviewer-led casing focused on Capital One Shopping. I was initially asked about potential revenue streams and improvements for the app. Then, I was asked how I would test these improvements, and I suggested A/B testing. I was given a chart displaying A/B test results and had to recommend an email style. Finally, I compared two email UX designs and provided critiques and improvement suggestions. I felt the process wasn't too difficult as long as I commented well on the information I was given and provided direction.
This was a deep dive into a technical product/feature I previously led, using the STAR method. I had to think about my trade-off evaluations, lessons learned, and how I interacted with stakeholders. I received feedback that I used too much technical jargon, which was surprising since it was for a tech team. I realized that the interviewers might not be from the specific org I was interviewing for.
The case focused on a low-code/no-code website builder targeting restaurants.
Q1: I was asked to identify the target customer segment. Initially, I said medium-sized restaurants without their own tech team. The interviewer wanted me to define the entire market, so I discussed small, medium, and large restaurants, as well as online ordering platforms seeking integrated services.
Q2: I was asked about monetization strategies and discussed cost structures and revenue models (free with ads, freemium, subscription, etc.).
Q3: I was given Exhibit A and asked to calculate 2-year profitability. The details were:
I calculated the profit as 200 + 20x24 - (300 + 100x2) = $180. I was then asked about the first year's profit, which highlighted that the first year had lower profits due to the onboarding cost.
Q4: I was asked whether to integrate a location system externally or build it ourselves (this required thinking through the reasons for each).
Q5: I was given Exhibit B showing engineer effort and upkeep costs for each approach:
Key points:
Q6: I was asked what Exhibit B didn't consider (e.g., adoption).
Q7: Exhibit C gave a customer base of 100,000 and different growth rates based on the strategy (integration 5%, self-built 3%). Using the $180 profit from Q3, I calculated the additional profit from the increased customers, which showed that integration could cover the extra costs.
Q8: I gave my final recommendation.
This case was about a credit card partnership with Uber. The goal was to increase engagement to drive spend. The exhibits were more limited. I made a few minor mistakes but was course-corrected. I was initially asked about potential partnerships and which might be more profitable. Then, I was given three customer segments with their before and after spend on the merchant and the card:
I was asked about the profitability, whether it made sense, and why we would do it if it was a loss (adoption). Follow-up questions included how many customers would be needed to break even if each customer was worth $300 to other Capital One business units, and what the likelihood of reaching that break-even number was. Finally, I summarized my recommendation.
This was a DMV improvement case. I was shown three customer reviews and an overview of the DMV. I wasn't asked to calculate anything, but I had to identify several problems, define a problem statement, solution, storyboard, and summarize my recommendations to management, including whether the proposed solution addressed the problem statement.