What did you do before Creem — why this product got started?

• Before founding Creem, I spent over a decade building in fintech and crypto payments. I started my journey in 2012, when crypto was still a niche movement, by creating one of the first crypto dev agencies in Brazil.
• Over the years, I worked on projects in Forex, commodities, and later became Product Director and Technical Lead in the industry, building infrastructure for early-stage fintechs and exchanges.
• Over time, I got closer to a new wave of builders: lean, technically strong, globally connected teams who wanted to focus fully on their product, not on back-office complexity. We saw a clear shift happening: instead of just “one-person unicorns,” we’re seeing fluid, distributed teams, creators, developers, and partners collaborating in flexible ways. These teams need to accept payments globally, handle tax compliance automatically, and split revenue seamlessly, without stitching together dozens of tools. That’s why Creem was born: to give these teams a single, clean financial layer so they can build faster, work smoothly with partners, and actually focus on what they love, shipping great products.

What worked best for you in scaling rapidly after the launch?

• Clear value from day one: We solved a real pain point. People understood quickly what Creem does and why it matters. That clarity made early adoption fast.
• Lean and focused execution: We built only what mattered most: fast onboarding, stable payouts, automated tax handling. By not overcomplicating the product, we scaled fast without a big team.
• Community first: Instead of a big sales machine, we grew through real founder communities. One founder sharing their experience with 10 others was way more powerful than ads.

If you’d be advising European political leaders on how to attract more founders like yourself, what would be your key message(s)?

I’d keep it simple: make it easy to build from Europe.

• GDPR is a clear example: Privacy is essential, but forcing full compliance from day one, regardless of revenue or scale, puts EU startups at a global disadvantage. Early-stage companies in the U.S. or Asia can move faster with less overhead, while EU founders lose time and resources on legal frameworks meant for enterprises. There should be a clear revenue or user threshold before these obligations fully kick in.
• Common fundraising instruments:  Right now, founders have to juggle multiple local variations of early-stage financing tools (e.g. different "SAFEs", WISEs in Sweden, etc.). This slows down fundraising, drags legal work, and burns time on things that don’t impact the business. A standardized EU-wide instrument would let startups close rounds faster and spend more time building.
• Encourage fast movers: The EU should actively reward and support startups that act quickly. In the U.S. or Asia, speed is expected. In Europe, it’s often penalized with bureaucracy.

‍