B

Shareholder Meeting Agenda Impact Simulator

2.75

Derivation Chain

Step 1 AGM season + major conglomerate restructuring
→
Step 2 Minority shareholder voting rights exercise demand
→
Step 3 Per-agenda stock price and governance impact simulation

Problem

During AGM season at major corporations like Hyundai Mobis, over 70% of minority shareholders (particularly salaried workers aged 30-50 with investments of 5-50 million won / ~$3,750-$37,500) either apathetically delegate their voting rights or blindly vote against proposals based on online community sentiment, because they cannot understand the real impact of agenda items such as dividend increases, treasury stock cancellation, or executive appointments. There is no tool to simulate the stock price impact of each agenda item in advance, making rational decision-making impossible.

Solution

Input AGM agenda items (dividend rate changes, director appointments, charter amendments, etc.) and the system analyzes post-approval/rejection stock price movement patterns from similar historical agendas, then simulates the expected impact if the item passes (changes in EPS, BPS, dividend yield). Provides a one-page summary enabling minority shareholders to grasp the key points and decide their vote within 5 minutes.

Target: Minority shareholders aged 30-50 with investments of 5-50 million won (~$3,750-$37,500), individual investors who follow AGMs for 1-3 stocks per year
Revenue Model: Premium Subscription at 29,000 won (~$22)/month per account (covers all listed company AGMs), Free Plan (3 agenda analyses per year), 30% discount for annual billing
Ecosystem Role: Consumer
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
2.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
3.0/5
V Validation
2.0/5
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 (67%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
17.9/25
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 (50/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
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

Data Pipeline [medium] AI/ML [medium] Frontend [low]
Dashboard