B

Performance-Specialized Fair Draw & Queue Embeddable API SaaS

4.30

Signal Sources (v8 Triple Source)

Trigger

팬 대기열·공정 추첨 API

Market

Gleam·Rafflecopter (추첨/래플 SaaS) — 한국 팬덤 특화·본인인증 연동 부재

Workflow

팬 대기열·공정 추첨 API — 기획사 자사 채널 추첨 인프라 수요

Problem

Demand for fair draws is exploding for K-POP fan meetings, musical VIP seats, and limited merchandise sales, but agencies collect entries via Google Forms and draw winners using Excel RAND(). There is no way to prove the transparency of results, leading to repeated fan complaints and the same manual work for every event.

Solution

Agencies embed a draw widget on their site/app with a single API call, automating entry collection → blockchain hash-based seed disclosure → fair drawing → sequential queue → result notifications. The seed and algorithm are publicly disclosed so fans can verify, and winner identity verification integration is also supported.

Target: K-POP fan meeting and concert agency operations teams + musical and theater production marketing managers
Revenue Model: Per-event billing: 50,000 KRW (~$37.50) per event, or monthly subscription of 150,000 KRW (~$112.50) for unlimited events
Ecosystem Role: -
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
4.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
5.0/5
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.
N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20

Feasibility (81%)

Tech Complexity
40.0/40
Data Availability
21.2/25
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.

Market Validation (58/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
9.8/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
Solo Buildability
8.0/10
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.
Dashboard