S

Delivery App Fee Dissector for Small Business Owners

4.75

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Small business digital operations
→
Step 2 Opaque delivery app settlement problem
→
Step 3 Operating without knowing actual per-order net profit

Problem

Small restaurant and cafe owners aged 45-58 use three delivery apps simultaneously (Baemin, Coupang Eats, Yogiyo—Korea's top delivery platforms), but each has different fee structures (platform commission, delivery agency fees, advertising costs, payment processing fees) and different settlement cycles. At month-end, 30-40% of revenue is missing from their bank account, and it's nearly impossible to break down where each deduction went. They lack the evidence to decide whether to raise menu prices or drop a specific app.

Solution

Upload each delivery app's monthly settlement statement (PDF or Excel) to break down actual per-order net profit by app and menu item. First, it separates and visualizes platform commission, delivery agency fees, advertising costs, payment processing fees, and VAT by line item. Second, it identifies menu items that are 'per-order loss-makers on delivery.' Third, it compares profitability across apps to provide decision support like 'keep this app, reduce ad spend on this one, consider dropping this one.'

Target: Aged 45-58, 1-2 person restaurant/cafe/snack shop owners, running 2+ delivery apps simultaneously, monthly revenue $7,500-$37,500 range
Revenue Model: One free monthly analysis (single app), full multi-app integrated analysis + per-menu profitability Report at $7.50/month, delivery app optimization consulting referral
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
5.0/5
R Realizability
5.0/5
V Validation
5.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (72%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
23.1/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (67/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
20.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
15.0/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [medium] Backend [medium] Data Pipeline [low]
Dashboard