Ion Gonța, founder of TaxFlow
All the signals point in one direction.
And yet a retailer entering Moldova with an operating model calibrated for Romania will discover, within the first 90 days, that the figures are not behaving as expected. Not because the market is wrong. But because the gap between potential and effective operation in Moldova is specific, structural and almost invisible from the outside.
16% gross margin and net loss. How is it possible.
A Moldovan retailer can operate at a solid gross margin – 13-19%, comparable to regional standards – and still make a net loss at the end of the year. No fraud, no incompetent management, no market crisis. Simply because the space between the gross margin and the bottom line is populated by costs that input models do not anticipate.
Most unexpected: customer credit. The sale of electronics and home appliances is largely done through point-of-sale financing instruments. The cost of that financing – fees to microcredit operators – can consume 3 to 4 percentage points of turnover. It’s a line that doesn’t show up in any market report, but it shows up in every Profit and Loss report, real.
The second layer: staffing structure. The shortage of skilled staff in warehousing, delivery and sales is not cyclical – it’s structural. Sales managers work in process segments – call is one man’s, delivery is another man’s, collection is someone else’s. Taking responsibility for the full cycle from contact to collection is rare and expensive.
Suppliers don’t give you credit because they don’t know you.
A new retailer in Moldova has no connections. No track record. No local references. Suppliers work on the basis of trust built up over time – and a new operator, regardless of its size in other markets, starts from scratch on that dimension.
In practice, this means that the cashflow model built on trade credit – net 30, net 45, standard in Romanian retail – does not work in the first 12 months. The working capital needed to launch is substantially higher than standard projections. A retailer that doesn’t anticipate that will feel the cash pressure before it feels the growth.
There’s an additional layer: inventory records at suppliers are not always in sync with physical reality. Orders may be partially fulfilled, products picked may differ from those ordered, invoices may be late or consolidated in ways that complicate reconciliation. It’s not ill will – it’s the absence of systems.
Consumer behavior is not a cultural preference – it’s a structural constraint.
About 45% of all online stores in Moldova had zero card transactions in the first half of 2025. The preference for cash on delivery isn’t a local peculiarity that disappears with time and marketing – it’s a symptom of a digital trust ecosystem still under construction.
The lack of a dominant marketplace to focus supply and traffic means that no player has so far succeeded in creating the standard of experience that migrates consumers from offline to online at scale. Logistics reflect the same reality: functional in Chisinau, fragmented in the rest of the country. Failed delivery rates are structurally higher than in mature markets, and the cost of return – physical, operational, financial – is a systematically underestimated budget component.
The gap is an opportunity, not an obstacle.
A significant acceleration of the market could come precisely from the launch of an eMAG-type marketplace, able to negotiate better prices with distributors and attract European suppliers – but previous attempts have failed because of insufficient investment and low bargaining power with suppliers. That means the window is open, but getting in right matters more than getting in fast.
Moldova’s e-commerce market is estimated to grow from USD 1.06 billion in 2025 to USD 1.67 billion by 2030. Electronics and appliances remain the dominant category, partly shielded from cross-border competition by the physical nature of the products. Ongoing European integration brings access to more competitive EU suppliers and more predictable regional logistics.
Those who enter with robust financial control systems, a cashflow model calibrated to the local reality and an understanding of the specific cost structure will operate at a real advantage over other players who will repeat the standard mistakes.
The difference between a retailer that enters Moldova and loses and a retailer that enters and wins is not the product, it’s not the marketing and it’s not the price. It’s the ability to operationally manage a context where the default rules are different from familiar markets – and to build control systems before invisible losses become visible in the P&L report.
Moldova is not complicated. It’s a market in the making. And that, for those who come prepared, is a real opportunity.
by Ion Gonța – founder of TaxFlow
