Suite value & investor return (illustrative)
Product context: One company · one plan-reading spine · peer products Estym8, Bodi, ClearToPermit, ClearToIssue, Feasibility. Canonical framing: AI-first positioning · suite map.
Purpose: Stress portfolio value and return optionality for the lean raise — without pretending we have audited ARR forecasts per SKU.
Status: Illustrative · diligence conversation · not investment advice · not an offer to sell securities.
Public: /docs/suite-value
Last updated: August 2026.
Companion docs: Suite backlog · Valuation framework · Investor overview · Investor one-pager.
1. What this raise funds (suite, not Estym8-only)
| Claim | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Funds the suite | Capital covers lean runway for engineering and GTM on the shared spine and all job heads in the entity — Estym8, Bodi, ClearToPermit, ClearToIssue, Feasibility. |
| Estym8 is still the revenue wedge | Near-term paying seats and case studies come from GC / estimator takeoff first. |
| Not a separate seed per SKU | One lean raise; one burn rate; sequenced product work — not five parallel hiring plans. |
Use of funds remains lean ops + marketing + legal + key-person + reserve (fundraise brief). What changes vs older framing: that burn is explicitly suite development capacity, not “Estym8 only with zero $ for ClearTo*.”
2. Why the suite increases return optionality
Strategic buyers (Trimble / Procore / Autodesk-class — valuation §6.5) pay for:
- Defensible wedge — organic folder-native takeoff (Estym8).
- Breadth on one IP spine — municipal review + A/E QA + ICT BOD + feasibility without five acquisitions.
- Proof — ARR + retention + references (start with Estym8 seats).
- Clean story — workflow apps with AI assist, not chatbot SKUs; humans keep stamps.
Investor return path (primary): SAFE → strategic acquisition (or later priced round) at a step-up driven by Estym8 revenue plus suite optionality that expands the buyer set (GC precon, cities, A/E firms, ICT contractors, developers).
We do not claim a guaranteed multiple or timeline. Hope: noise + revenue inside ~12 months; raise sized for a full year.
3. Value pools by product (illustrative — not additive ARR)
These are buyer-value / market-shape stories for diligence — same honesty bar as valuation §5A/§5B. Do not sum them into one TAM and call it Estym8 ARR.
| Product | Buyer | Value story (illustrative) | Estym8-linked anchor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estym8 | GC / estimators | Labor hours saved on takeoff + fewer rework RFIs; seat SaaS | Valuation §3–§5 · Solo ~$179/mo · one saved day ≈ month of seats |
| Bodi | ICT / LV | Faster BOD from scattered sources; claim lineage vs re-keying | Bundle / adjacent seat later; not priced this round |
| ClearToPermit | Cities / AHJs | Examiner hours per submittal + fewer incomplete cycles; staff efficiency | City seat / site license TBD in pilot; not city BOM |
| ClearToIssue | Design agencies / A/E | Review cycle time + issues caught pre-issue | Firm seat TBD with Paul pilot |
| Feasibility | Architects / developers | Early go/no-go hours before schematic burn | Discovery pricing TBD |
Fee-on-value reminder (from valuation): Industry labor-value pools (e.g. ~$5B/yr at 20% efficiency) are buyer unlock, not vendor revenue. A 1–2% fee on any such pool is still only an illustrative ARR thought experiment.
4. Portfolio ARR sensitivity (conversation brackets)
Assume Estym8 reaches early revenue first; suite SKUs layer later. Illustrative only:
| Scenario (36-month story) | Estym8 ARR | Suite add-on ARR (Bodi + ClearTo* + Feasibility) | Combined ARR | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | $0.3–0.6M | $0–0.1M | ~$0.3–0.7M | Estym8 seats; suite still discovery |
| Base | $1–2M | $0.3–0.8M | ~$1.3–2.8M | 1 city pilot + A/E design-partner seats + Bodi early |
| Upside | $3–5M | $1–3M | ~$4–8M | Multiple AHJs + firm rollouts; still not “full TAM capture” |
Apply private SaaS multiples from valuation §6–§7 (~5–8× ARR conversation band when growth/retention support it) → enterprise value brackets, not a fairness opinion.
Strategic premium: A buyer that wants takeoff + municipal + A/E QA may pay more for one spine than for Estym8 alone — that premium is qualitative optionality until we have suite ARR; do not invent a precise “suite multiple uplift.”
5. What we will measure (so return claims stay honest)
| Metric | Product | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Paying seats / MRR / churn | Estym8 | Primary raise proof |
| ROM chase-vs-pass ranking quality | Estym8 | Screening depth ROI for estimators |
| Time-to-deficiency list / false-positive rate | ClearToPermit | City pilot success |
| Issues caught pre-issue / review cycle time | ClearToIssue | A/E pilot success |
| BOD draft time / claim coverage | Bodi | Companion product proof |
| Time-to-go/no-go | Feasibility | Discovery success |
6. Sequencing funded by this raise
Aligned with SUITE_BACKLOG.md:
- Estym8 — pipeline → UX (incl. ROM/WAG) → beta → Stripe revenue.
- ClearToPermit — elevate MVP when city pilot commits (parallel once spine trust is enough).
- ClearToIssue — Paul checklist → design-agency pilot.
- Bodi — write-boundary already defined; shared org/auth + Estym8→Bodi feeds.
- Feasibility — public parcel/zoning path after ClearTo* rule-pack habits exist.
7. Claims we do not make
- Guaranteed investor IRR or acquisition price
- Additive “$X billion suite TAM” as Estym8 revenue
- Automatic permit approval, PE stamp replacement, or city BOM
- That ClearTo* / Feasibility are GA this quarter
Do claim: this raise funds suite development on one spine; Estym8 is the near-term cash wedge; adjacent products expand strategic return optionality.