A

Business Pivot Permit Comparison Navigator

3.95

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Automating small business closure and pivot procedures
→
Step 2 The problem of being unable to compare permit requirements when pivoting to a different industry after closing

Problem

When a 57-year-old restaurant owner considers pivoting to a cafe, co-working space, coin laundry, or unmanned convenience store after closing their business, each industry has different permit requirements (Food Sanitation Act vs. Public Health Act vs. Distribution Industry Development Act), required certifications, facility standards, initial investment costs, and zoning change eligibility for their current leased space. This information is scattered across district offices, city halls, and fire departments, making cross-industry comparison impossible. They must pay for separate administrative consultant sessions at 200,000–500,000 KRW ($150–$375) per industry. Choosing the wrong industry — only to discover permits are unobtainable — frequently results in deposit losses.

Solution

Users enter their current business address, floor area, and zoning designation, then select 3–5 industries of interest. The service generates a side-by-side comparison table of permit requirements, required certifications, facility standards, and estimated initial costs for each industry. It performs a self-diagnosis of zoning change eligibility based on building registry data and pre-filters industries where conversion is not possible.

Target: Ages 50–60, currently operating or recently closed a small Self-employed business (restaurant, retail), considering a business pivot within the same commercial space
Revenue Model: Compare 2 industries free. 5-industry comparison + permit checklist PDF for 4,900 KRW (~$3.70). Referral commission on connections to administrative consultants and Tax Accounting professionals.
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
4.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
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 (71%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
21.7/25
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 (53/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
7.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
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] Data Pipeline [low]
Dashboard