Build the capability.
Validate the business.
A focused vertical workspace for Guangzhou’s small industrial leasing teams. Start with one property. Prove better demand qualification. Then test repeatability.
Experience the productThe owner has space.
The team needs a method.
Independent owners with one or a few industrial sites, 1–8 leasing employees and substantial reliance on brokers. The buyer is the owner or leasing head; the user is the existing employee.
The supplied interview describes approximately 373,000 ㎡ of industrial space, within a 387,000 ㎡ total industrial-and-office portfolio. Industrial occupancy fell from about 90% to below 70%; five employees rely mainly on broker leads.
Owner interview supplied by the project team. Not independently audited; not product performance evidence.
Relationships and deal coordination; owners may lack a direct demand workflow.
Broader intelligence and management; test the onboarding burden for small teams.
Flexible tools; industrial constraints and qualification workflows need configuration.
Familiar tools; shared, traceable customer knowledge is harder to maintain.
Differentiation hypothesis: a lightweight, evidence-led workflow that helps ordinary staff qualify actual industrial leasing needs. Competitive advantage remains unproven.
A subscription to capability.
Pricing hypotheses · not validated¥3,000–10,000
One property, a small team and a standard leasing workflow.
¥12,000–24,000
Per year. Property profiles, customer records and leasing guidance.
¥24,000–50,000
Per year. Multiple properties, team analysis and deeper research.
Research add-ons would be priced separately. No deal guarantee; broker services remain complementary. All amounts are CNY.
Test the smallest useful loop.
This is a proposed pilot roadmap, not completed work.
Property foundation
Structure one real building and establish a staff workflow.
Signal research
Research target companies and source-backed evidence cards.
Real conversations
Guide 1–2 employees, record contacts and actual feedback.
Efficiency & cost
Measure research time, qualification costs and failure reasons.
External validation
Test reuse and willingness to pay with other owners.
Predefined experiment targets
Adjustable thresholds. These are not expected outcomes or achieved results.
Measure the cost
of a useful opportunity.
Primary test: time and money spent per company-confirmed, initially suitable leasing opportunity. Track staff research and contact time alongside direct tool and data costs.
Retained constraints, requirements, rejection reasons and outcomes may improve the workflow. That is a potential learning advantage, not an existing exclusive moat.
Cost per verified opportunityTo measure
Research + contact + tool costs / verified, initially suitable opportunities.
Customer acquisition costTo measure
Acquisition spending / new paying owners.
Gross marginTo measure
Revenue less direct data, AI and delivery costs / revenue.
Activation rateTo measure
Onboarded staff completing their first customer follow-up / onboarded staff.
Pilot-to-paid conversionTo measure
Pilots becoming paid subscriptions / completed pilots.
RetentionTo measure
Track cohort renewals and ongoing workflow use.
No fabricated unit economics or growth curves. Cross-owner learning would require authorization and appropriate anonymization.
¥250,000
Approximately six months. All amounts in CNY.
Fund the evidence that the product helps staff, that owners will pay, and that delivery can scale beyond founder-led manual work.
Proposed allocation, not expenditure incurred. If value, payment or repeatability fail, do not expand costly data investment.
Judge it in the demo