Enter the password to continue

Discovery & Planning Document

Building the European interior materials platform

A comprehensive reference for the planned EU version of Melfabco — covering partnership structure, entity formation, market strategy, technology direction, and open decisions.

Status
Planning phase
Partners
Mark Zyluk (Nettsy) + Leeor Cohen
Entity direction
Leaning Polish sp. z o.o.
Launch markets
Likely NL, Austria, Ireland
01

Project overview

What we're building and why the EU market is wide open.

Melfabco EU is a planned European version of the Melfabco US e-commerce platform for interior materials — fabrics, carpets, tiles, wall coverings. The EU version will be rebuilt from scratch to fit the European market, with its own codebase, brand, legal entity, and product catalog — completely separate from the US operation.

The core differentiator: an AI-powered design assistant that uses semantic search over a deep product catalog to help designers, architects, and homeowners discover the right materials. This technology is proven in the US version and has zero competition in the European market.

EU interior materials e-commerce is genuinely underserved digitally. The big players (Tarkett/DESSO, Interface, Mohawk) are manufacturers with traditional B2B distribution. Wayfair and Westwing are generalist retailers. Nobody is doing AI-driven semantic search across a curated materials catalog with a design assistant.

The opportunity in one sentence: A €45B+ European interior design market with zero AI-powered e-commerce competition, approaching universal digital inclusion, and a growing preference for online material sourcing among design professionals.

Market size
€45B+

European interior design market (2024)

Competition
Zero

AI-powered materials e-commerce in EU

E-com growth
7%

European e-commerce YoY growth

Digital reach
93%

Internet penetration across Europe

02

Partnership structure

Equal partners with complementary contributions and defined domains.

MN

Mark (Nettsy)

Technology · Marketing · Operations · Poland-based

Built the entire US Melfabco platform. Will handle all development, marketing, EU compliance, and day-to-day operations. Currently also doing marketing retainer work for the US side.

ContributesFull tech & marketing effort
Final say onTechnology & marketing
Equity50% from day one
LC

Leeor Cohen

Product · Industry · Capital · USA-based

Owns Melfabco US. Brings textile/interior materials industry expertise, supplier relationships, product knowledge, and operational know-how. Proposed as partner for the EU venture.

Contributes~€40-50K capital + industry expertise
Final say onProduct & supplier decisions
Equity50% from day one

First revenue from day one: The existing Melfabco US development work can be routed through the EU entity — becoming the company's first revenue stream before any product sales. See Section 04: How money flows in.

03

Entity & incorporation

Leaning towards a Polish sp. z o.o. — substance matches jurisdiction.

Explored

Dutch BV

Netherlands — dismissed
IssueNeeds NL substance
IssueHigher compliance costs
IssueRisk of PL tax residency anyway
Explored

Estonian OÜ

E-Residency — dismissed
IssueSame substance problem
IssueScrutiny with physical goods
Issue0% only on retained earnings
04

How money flows in

The EU entity's revenue sources — starting from day one with the US development relationship, scaling into product sales.

Phase 0: Immediate cash flow — US development contract

Before the EU platform generates a single sale, the entity can have revenue from day one. Melfabco US already pays for ongoing development and marketing work. That work is currently done by Mark personally — but once the EU entity exists, the EU company becomes the service provider that Melfabco US contracts with.

This is structurally clean: the EU entity provides real development and marketing services to Melfabco US, and Melfabco US pays for them. Leeor owns Melfabco US and holds 50% of the EU entity — so in practice, he's routing ~50% of what he pays for US development back to an entity he co-owns. But the services are real, the pricing is arm's-length, and the arrangement is completely standard for cross-border service companies.

After launch

EU product sales

B2C + B2B e-commerce
WhatInterior materials sales
B2CHomeowners, renovators
B2BArchitects, contractors (30% discount)
ModelSamples → full orders
TimelinePost-launch, scaling
Future

Potential streams

As the platform matures
IdeaProject board fees
IdeaPro/architect subscriptions
IdeaSupplier placement fees
IdeaWhite-label AI for studios
TimelineYear 2+

Why this matters for entity formation: The US development contract gives the EU entity legitimate revenue and operating history from the start. This isn't just cash flow — it means the company has a financial track record when it comes to opening bank accounts, establishing credit, and demonstrating substance to tax authorities. The entity isn't a shell waiting for a product launch — it's an active services company from day one.

How money flows out — three clean paths

Both partners extract value through methods that reflect their actual contributions:

1. Service fees (pre-tax) — The EU entity pays each partner's company for services actually rendered. Mark: technology and marketing services. Leeor: supplier sourcing, product expertise, industry guidance. These are deductible business expenses, reducing taxable profit. Fees must be arm's-length.

2. Dividends (post-tax) — Standard profit distribution after corporate tax. Under the US-Poland tax treaty, withholding is 15% (or 5% if Leeor holds through a US entity with 10%+ ownership).

3. Management fees — Similar to service fees but for strategic/management role. Can be structured company-to-company.

Transfer pricing note: Because Leeor owns both Melfabco US (the payer) and 50% of the EU entity (the provider), the US development contract is a related-party transaction. The pricing needs to be arm's-length — documented as what you'd reasonably charge a third party. Not complicated at this scale, but get it documented from day one.

05

Market analysis

16 markets scored across 13 factors. English-first strategy unlocks 232M consumers with just two languages.

Tier 1 — Launch markets · English + EU + EUR
Tier 2 — Fast expansion · English-friendly, model proven

Nordics

27M combined · €55-90K · Mixed currencies
7.9
/ 10
English#5-8 globally
EdgeDesign-obsessed, premium
WatchNorway non-EU, 4 currencies

Belgium

11.6M · €52K GDP/cap · EUR
7.4
/ 10
English#9 globally
EdgeEU carpet mfg cluster
WatchNL/FR/DE language split

UK

67M · £48K GDP/cap · GBP
7.4
/ 10
EnglishNative
EdgeBiggest EN market, 51% renovated '24
WatchBrexit customs border
Tier 3 — Localization required · Large or wealthy markets

Germany

84M · €52K · EUR
6.8
/ 10
NeedsFull DE locale
Edge19% of EU design market

Switzerland

8.8M · €95K · CHF
6.5
/ 10
NeedsNon-EU, CHF, customs
EdgeHighest spend per capita

Portugal

10.3M · €27K · EUR
6.3
/ 10
NeedsLower GDP, low e-com
EdgeEN #6 globally, EU/EUR

Poland

38M · €22K · PLN
5.8
/ 10
NeedsPL locale, lower GDP
EdgeHome base, zero friction

Baltics

6M comb. · €25-30K · EUR
5.5
/ 10
EdgeEU/EUR, close to PL

Spain

48M · €32K · EUR
5.5
/ 10
EdgeValencia tile cluster

France

68M · €44K · EUR
5.2
/ 10
Edge#1 EU e-com turnover

Czech Rep.

10.8M · €30K · CZK
5.2
/ 10
EdgeNeighbor, next-day ship
Tier 4 — Long-term plays

Italy

59M · €37K · EUR
4.8
/ 10
EdgeMilan design + world-class manufacturing
ChallengeLowest W.EU e-commerce (46%)

Hungary + SEE

10M+ · €20K · HUF
4.3
/ 10
EdgeClose, low competition
ChallengeLow GDP, own currency, full locale

Master factor comparison

All 16 markets scored across 13 factors. Strong fit · Workable · Significant challenge

FactorNLATIENord.BEUKDECHPTPLBalt.ESFRCZITHU+
AI assistant languageENENENENEN*ENDEDE+EN?PLEN?ESFRCSITHU
Interior design market€3-4B€2-3B€1-2B€4-5B€2-3B€12B+€8.5B€2-3B€1-2B€2-3B<€1B€5-6B€7B+€1-2B€6B+<€1B
Willingness to payHighHighV.highPrem.HighHighCarefulV.highMedLowerLowerMixedMixedMedMixedLow
Renovation activityMod.StrongStrongHighMod.V.highStrongStrongMod.Grow.Mod.Mod.Grow.Mod.Mod.Mod.
Design cultureDutchViennaGrow.IconicMixedGlobalFunct.HighGrow.Emerg.BasicStrongParisMod.World+Mod.
Regulatory easeEUEUEUNO!EUCust.StrictNon-EUEUHomeEUEUCmplxEUSlowEU
Logistics from PL2-3d1-2d3-4d3-5d2-3dCust.1d2-3d4-5dDom.2-3d4-5d3-4d1d3-5d1-2d
EN brand name fitOKOKNat.OKOKNat..deOKOKTrendyOKES prefFR prefOKIT prefOK
AI materials competitionZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZeroZero
Supplier proximityBE cl.SomeSomeEgeClusterSomeTech t.SomeSomeSomeFewTiles!SomeSomeWorld+Few
CurrencyEUREUREUR4 diffEURGBPEURCHFEURPLNEUREUREURCZKEURHUF
E-com maturity94%78%95%+84-91~80%91%~80%~75%~56%~65%60-7070%73%~73%~46%~55%
Score8.68.38.17.97.47.46.86.56.35.85.55.55.25.24.84.3
06

Rollout strategy

A 36-month phased expansion — two languages cover 232M consumers by Phase 4.

Strategic insight: By Phase 4 (month 24), with just English and German, the platform reaches ~232M consumers across the wealthiest markets in Europe. The entire Tier 1 and Tier 2 expansion requires zero localization investment.

1

Netherlands + Austria + Ireland

All work in English, all EU + EUR. NL is the anchor market, AT is the closest to Poland (1-2 day shipping), IE is the only native-English EU state. Validate the entire business model without touching localization.

Months 0–6 · 33M consumers
2

Belgium (Flemish) + Nordics

Widen the English-friendly EU footprint. Belgium puts you next to the carpet manufacturing cluster. Nordics bring premium, design-obsessed buyers. Handle Norway's non-EU status as a contained challenge.

Months 6–12 · +39M consumers (72M cumulative)
3

UK

Biggest English-speaking prize. Tackle customs border, UK VAT registration, and IOSS setup as a focused project — justified by proven operations and product-market fit.

Months 12–18 · +67M consumers (139M cumulative)
4

Germany + Switzerland (DE locale)

First major localization push. German AI assistant, German product content, German search. Switzerland folds in with same DE content + CHF pricing. Unlocks the full DACH region.

Months 18–24 · +93M consumers (232M cumulative)
5

Poland + Baltics + Czech Republic

Polish localization for home market. Baltics can stay EN or get light local touches. Czech locale if warranted by demand signals. Low logistics cost, familiar territory.

Months 24–30 · +55M consumers (287M cumulative)
6

France + Spain + Portugal

Romance language push. FR and ES localizations unlock ~165M consumers. Portugal can piggyback on high English proficiency or get light PT locale. Spain doubles as sourcing market for ceramics.

Months 30–36 · +126M consumers (413M cumulative)
7

Italy + Hungary/SEE

Longest horizon. Italy needs IT locale but gives access to world-class manufacturing and Milan's design ecosystem. Hungary and Southeast Europe are opportunistic additions.

Months 36+ · +80M consumers (493M cumulative)
07

Tech stack direction

Considering Medusa over Shopify for the EU build — owning the commerce layer natively.

The US version is already essentially a custom app with Shopify bolted on. For the EU, Mark is considering Medusa (open-source, Node.js/TypeScript headless commerce) to own the entire commerce layer. US and EU catalogs are completely separate — no product or inventory overlap — so running different backends is clean.

EU version — Proposed

Medusa v2

Open-source headless commerce
Frontend
Next.js 15+
App Router, React 19, TypeScript
Commerce
Medusa v2
Node.js/TS, custom modules
Database
Supabase PostgreSQL
pgvector for semantic search
AI/ML
Gemini embeddings
Vercel AI SDK, semantic search
Payments
Stripe + local
BLIK (PL), iDEAL (NL), etc.
Styling
Tailwind CSS 4
Headless UI, Lucide React
US version — Current

Shopify Storefront

Custom frontend + Shopify backend
Frontend
Next.js 15
App Router, React 19, TypeScript
Commerce
Shopify Storefront API
GraphQL
Database
Supabase PostgreSQL
pgvector, same as EU
AI/ML
Gemini embeddings
Same as EU
Products
~50K products
1M+ variants via Matrixify
Styling
Tailwind CSS 4
Same as EU

Why Medusa for EU?

Full data model control — no more cramming complex product schemas into Shopify metafields. Custom pricing logic (wholesale tiers) becomes first-class.

Direct query path — pgvector semantic search can query commerce data directly instead of syncing between Shopify and Supabase.

Multi-currency/multi-region — built into Medusa v2. Critical for a pan-European rollout.

No per-transaction fees — significant on B2B large orders. Project board and architect portal can be proper Medusa modules.

Risks to manage

Payments — need to wire up Stripe + EU-specific methods (BLIK, iDEAL, Bancontact, etc.) manually.

Plugin ecosystem — Medusa v2 is still young. Some things that are one-click in Shopify will be custom work.

No admin UI out of the box — team and vendors would need to adapt to a custom or Medusa-native admin.

08

Brand naming

The EU platform will have its own brand — independent from Melfabco.

Extensive naming research has been done. The "materia/terra" namespace was explored exhaustively but found to be extremely crowded with existing businesses and registrations. The search continues.

What the name needs to do

Work inEnglish-first, pan-European
Feel likePremium, modern, design-forward
Domain.com or .eu available
TrademarkClean in EU + UK classes
PronunciationUnambiguous across languages

What to avoid

Crowded"Materia", "Terra", "Casa" etc.
Tied to one lang.Names that only work in one market
GenericDescriptive names with no personality
Hard to spellIf you have to spell it out, it's wrong
ConfusableSimilar to existing interior brands

No final brand decision has been made yet. The name needs to work across English-first launch markets (NL, AT, IE, Nordics, UK) and eventually across the full EU. An English or invented-word name is strongly preferred — markets that lean toward local-language branding (FR, ES, IT) don't come until Phase 6-7.

09

Open decisions

Tracking where we're leaning, what's open, and what needs more work.

Leaning towards

Entity jurisdiction

Polish sp. z o.o. — substance matches jurisdiction, competitive tax rate, Dominika can handle legal setup.

Leaning towards

Equity split

50/50 ownership from day one. Both partners as equal co-founders with service agreements for their respective companies.

Leaning towards

Launch markets

Netherlands + Austria + Ireland — all English, EU, EUR. Zero localization needed to validate the model.

Leaning towards

US/EU separation

Completely separate: catalogs, brands, legal entities, codebases. No product or inventory overlap.

Open

Brand name

Research done, "materia/terra" namespace crowded. No shortlist yet that feels right. Needs continued exploration + domain/trademark checks.

Open

Commerce backend

Medusa v2 is the leading candidate over Shopify. Final decision pending deeper technical evaluation.

Open

Leeor's ownership structure

Hold shares directly as US individual, or through a US LLC/Corp? Depends on his US tax advisor's recommendation.

Open

US dev contract routing

Routing the existing Melfabco US development work through the EU entity as its first revenue stream. Makes sense structurally — needs arm's-length pricing documented.

Open

Tiebreaker mechanism

Both partners have defined domains (Mark: tech/marketing, Leeor: product/supplier) but need a formal tiebreaker for shared decisions.

Open

EU supplier relationships

Which European suppliers to onboard first. Belgian carpet cluster (Mohawk, Tarkett/DESSO) is the likely starting point. Leeor's existing relationships may extend.