Service
Market research for a business plan
A market section fails when it asserts a number without showing where it came from. The research summary exists to make the argument traceable.
- Customer segments, competitor set and pricing context
- Sources listed, limits stated
- Written to slot into a plan, not as a standalone data dump
- No invented market sizes or statistics
What the market section has to prove
Not that the market is large. That the business can reach enough of it, at a price that works, against competitors who will respond.
That requires four things, in this order:
- A defined customer. Who they are, where they are, what they currently do.
- A sized opportunity, derived rather than asserted.
- A competitor set, including the substitutes customers actually use.
- A reason to win, stated in terms a reader can test.
How the research is built
Segment definition. A segment is only useful if it changes a decision. "Residents of Jeddah" is not a segment. "Families in northern Jeddah with two children, buying prepared meals three times a week" is.
Bottom-up sizing. Where possible the market is built from units: number of potential customers × purchase frequency × average price. The derivation is shown in a table so a reader can challenge any input.
Top-down context. Published market figures are used for context, cited with source and date, and never presented as the business's addressable market without adjustment.
Competitor mapping. Direct competitors, indirect competitors and substitutes. For each: positioning, price point, apparent strengths, obvious gaps. Based on public information — websites, menus, price lists, listings, reviews — not on private intelligence.
Pricing context. What customers currently pay, at what quality level, and where the proposed price sits relative to that.
What the deliverable contains
| Part | Contents |
|---|---|
| Segment table | Segment, size logic, needs, willingness to pay, accessibility |
| Market sizing | Bottom-up calculation with visible assumptions |
| Competitor table | Name, positioning, price band, strengths, gaps |
| Demand evidence | What supports the demand thesis, and what does not |
| Pricing map | Where the offer sits and why |
| Sources | Every source, dated, with a link where available |
| Limitations | What could not be verified and what it means |
Limits, stated plainly
I work remotely. That means no intercept surveys, no store audits, no mystery shopping in Jeddah. If the plan depends on primary field research, it will say so and recommend how to close the gap.
Published data for narrow sectors is often thin. When a number does not exist, the research says it does not exist and uses a clearly labelled estimate instead. That is more useful than a fabricated citation, and it survives scrutiny better.
Any statement about a government programme, licensing category or sector regulation is checked against the issuing authority's published guidance before it enters a document. Where that check has not been done, the statement is flagged rather than published as fact.
How it fits the plan
The research summary feeds directly into the market analysis section of a plan. It can also stand alone as a briefing document when a founder needs to understand a sector before committing to a concept.
If the question is broader — whether the venture is viable at all — a feasibility study is the right instrument.
How to read the research output
A research summary is not a verdict on whether to proceed. It is evidence. When reading one, separate three things:
| Category | What it tells you | How much weight to give it |
|---|---|---|
| Observed | What competitors charge, what they offer, where they are | High, if dated and sourced |
| Derived | A market size built from visible inputs | Medium, because the inputs can be wrong |
| Judged | Whether a segment will switch, how fast demand grows | Low to medium, and should be labelled as judgement |
A useful summary makes that separation explicit. A summary that blends all three into confident prose is harder to use and easier to misuse.
What it cannot tell you
- Whether customers will actually buy from you at your price.
- How competitors will respond to a new entrant.
- Whether a location will perform as expected.
- What a regulator will decide.
Those require primary evidence: conversations, trials, site testing, professional advice. The research narrows the uncertainty; it does not remove it.
When to refresh it
Market research ages quickly in fast-moving categories and slowly in stable ones. As a rule, figures older than twelve months should be rechecked before being used in a funding document, and competitor pricing should be re-verified within the month of submission.
That is not bureaucracy. A lender who finds a price on a competitor's website that contradicts the plan will question everything else in it.