Retention · UK Post-Churn Interviews
Findings from the first pass of outbound post-churn interviews across the 110 non-fraud merchants assigned to Antonio, Luke and Vitaly.
01
Of the 110 merchants split across the three interviewers, a quarter have been reached and fully interviewed. The rest are mostly no-answers and callbacks still worth chasing — not dead ends.
02
The CRM side here is the merchant's official cancel_reason (column Y) categorised directly — not the separately-mined reason bucket a category already exists for. Both sides are then sorted into the same set of buckets, so the raw system reason and what the merchant actually said on the call can be compared directly, not just read as two blocks of free text.
Mint cells = the CRM category and the interview-confirmed reason are the same underlying issue. Everywhere else, the CRM label didn't predict the real reason.
| Merchant | CRM reason (raw) | Interview reason (raw) |
|---|
03
Merchants often cited more than one factor, so these add up to more than 100%. Based on the 23 completed interviews with a genuine competitive churn driver (excludes one store closure and one administrative case). MOTO, pay-by-link and other card-not-present gaps are grouped as CNP.
04
Among the 20 interviews where the merchant named their new provider, Dojo accounts for more than half. Three merchants declined to say who they'd switched to.
05
Every reason a merchant gave for leaving, traced through to where they landed. Reasons aren't mutually exclusive, so this counts each of the 44 reason-mentions from the 23 substantive interviews separately — a merchant who cited both surcharge and payout appears in both flows.
Surcharge, payout timing, sales-process trust and rate/price each send exactly 4 mentions to Dojo (labelled above) — half of every reason-mention, regardless of category, ends up there. It isn't winning on one specific gap, it's simply the default landing spot across the board. Hover any other band for its count.
Counts are reason-mentions, not merchants — a merchant naming Teya after citing both surcharge and CNP appears in both columns. n = 19 mentions across the 9 merchants who named one of these 7 competitors.
06
Each bar covers every merchant who mentioned that reason (n matches section 3), split into would return, wouldn't, or gave no clear answer. Reasons overlap — of the 23 substantive interviews cited more than one — and samples are small, so read these as directional.