◆ Case · Location
Food & Beverage
~$340K saved · Month 4 breakeven at correct site
A fast-casual restaurant with two successful locations in the eastern GTA. The owner had identified a third location he was confident about — a commercial strip in a city west of Toronto. He had a letter of intent and was six weeks from signing a five-year lease.
He didn't have a question. He had a decision he considered already made. He came in to "do the financial model for the new location." The diagnostic opened a different conversation.
We mapped the customer base of the existing two locations using transaction data, postal codes, and delivery platform analytics. The customer density map was clear: nearly 70% of the revenue at both existing locations came from a tight radius concentrated in the eastern GTA. The city he had chosen for location three had almost no overlap with that customer profile.
We also ran a competitive density analysis. The target city already had four comparable fast-casual operators within a 2km radius, three of them established for 4+ years. The existing locations had entered markets with 0–1 comparable competitors at time of opening.
The data pointed to a different neighbourhood — a corridor in the northeastern GTA with a customer profile closely matching the existing base, two competitors (one of which had closed six months earlier), and available commercial space.
He declined the original lease. He signed at the data-indicated location four months later. The new location broke even in month four — faster than either of the first two locations. The avoided cost of the wrong location, modelled over a five-year lease with projected underperformance, was approximately $340,000.
◆ Does this sound familiar?
Every engagement starts with a diagnostic.
If any of the above resonates — that's exactly where to begin.
Start a Conversation