A

Venue Seat View Archive

3.65

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Performance & ticket market growth
→
Step 2 Venue Infrastructure expansion (Link the Space, etc.)
→
Step 3 Audience seat selection support service

Problem

With the rapid increase in performance venues — including NHN Link's Link the Space opening — centered around Daehangno and Seoul Arts Center, audiences lack seat-specific sightline and acoustics information for new venues, wasting an average of 15-20 minutes on seat selection when purchasing tickets. This often results in dissatisfied seat purchases followed by refunds and repurchases, costing $2.25-3.75 (~3,000-5,000 KRW) in fees per transaction. New venues especially have zero reviews, making 'seat gambling' unavoidable.

Solution

Crowdsource seat-specific sightline photos and 360-degree views per venue, combined with AI-based acoustic simulation (predicting quality based on seat distance and angle) to provide seat recommendations. Core features: (1) Upload and browse real photos by seat, (2) Optimal seat recommendations by performance genre (classical/musical/theater), (3) Deep-link integration with ticket booking sites.

Target: Ages 20-40 who attend performances at least once per month, with annual performance spending of $375+ (~50만원+)
Revenue Model: Premium Subscription at $2.15/month (~2,900 KRW) per account (basic views free; 360-degree views & AI recommendations are Premium). Venue operators: official seat view registration at $74/month (~9.9만원) per venue.
Ecosystem Role: Consumer
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
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 (70%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
20.8/25
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 (66/100)

Competition
10.0/20
Market Demand
20.0/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
7.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
7.5/15
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] AI/ML [low]
Dashboard