Sample paid file
Sample Standard commercial viability file
See the kind of analysis included in the £49 paid file after a free commercial check.
Sample verdict snapshot
Verdict
Fragile
The downside month covers operating costs, but upfront cash is the real issue.
Score
49/100
The site needs caution because the opening capital stack is weak.
Opening shortfall
£36,000
Upfront cash needed is higher than starting cash before trading begins.
Rent burden
20.0%
Rent takes a high share of expected monthly revenue.
Executive summary
A fragile site that fails the opening capital test.
The downside month still covers operating costs, but the site does not have enough cash after opening to absorb the fit-out and setup burden.
Verdict
Fragile
The downside month covers operating costs, but upfront cash is the real issue.
Score
49/100
The site needs caution because the opening capital stack is weak.
Opening shortfall
£36,000
Upfront cash needed is higher than starting cash before trading begins.
Rent burden
20.0%
Rent takes a high share of expected monthly revenue.
Site snapshot
The basic assumptions behind the sample case.
Business type
Cafe
Address
Redacted high street site
Postcode
NW6 sample
Reference
SAMPLE-FILE
Annual rent
£60,000
Monthly rent
£5,000
Average spend
£12
Expected customers/day
80
Opening days/month
26
Redacted
Key viability metrics
The core numbers the paid file makes easy to review.
Monthly revenue
£24,960
Monthly rent
£5,000
Rent burden
20%
Monthly cost base
£14,100
Break-even customers/day
45.2
Expected customers/day
80
Upfront cash and survival
The opening capital stack is the weak point.
Fit-out budget
£50,000
Rent deposit
£15,000
Legal fees
£3,000
Opening stock
£8,000
Other setup costs
£50,000
Starting cash
£90,000
Upfront cash needed
£126,000
Cash after opening
-£36,000
Downside revenue case
60%
Downside monthly revenue
£14,976
Downside monthly position
£876
Monthly burn in downside
£0
Six-month survival test
Fail
What would need to improve?
The deal needs a stronger opening capital position.
The site is not failing because the downside month burns cash. It is failing because upfront cash needed exceeds available starting cash before trading begins.
Stress-test scenarios
How the site behaves under weaker trading or improved lease terms.
| Scenario | Monthly revenue | Monthly position | Break-even/day | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base case | £24,960 | £10,860 surplus | 45.2 | Current assumptions are workable month to month, but the opening shortfall remains the main issue. |
| Revenue down 20% | £19,968 | £5,868 surplus | 56.5 | Trading is weaker, but the site still covers the cost base on these inputs. |
| Revenue down 40% | £14,976 | £876 surplus | 75.4 | The downside case still covers operating costs, which is why the opening capital stack matters more than monthly burn. |
| Costs up 15% | £24,960 | £8,745 surplus | 52.1 | Higher costs narrow the margin and make trading assumptions more fragile. |
| Rent reduced 10% | £24,960 | £11,360 surplus | 43.3 | A lower rent improves the operating margin and eases break-even pressure. |
Negotiation levers
Practical lease points worth testing before signing.
Lower headline rent
A lower rent reduces the monthly burden and improves the room available for staff, rates, stock, and quieter trading.
Rent-free period
A rent-free start gives the business breathing room while the site is being fitted out and early trading stabilises.
Landlord fit-out contribution
A contribution reduces the amount of cash that leaves the business before trading begins.
Reduced deposit
A smaller deposit keeps more cash in the business for opening stock and launch working capital.
Break clause
A break clause lowers the downside if the trading case fails to improve after launch.
Service charge cap
A cap helps stop shared costs from drifting beyond the numbers used in the initial check.
Repairing obligations
Clear repair terms reduce the risk of hidden costs after the lease is signed.
Permitted use flexibility
Flexible permitted use helps the business adapt if the original concept needs to change.
Evidence needed before signing
Trading, cost, and lease evidence that should be checked first.
Trading evidence
- Footfall counts
- Competitor observations
- Average spend validation
- Opening-hours assumption
- Local demand
Cost evidence
- Business rates bill or estimate
- Utility estimate
- Insurance
- Service charge
- Fit-out quotes
- Legal fees
Lease/legal evidence
- Rent review
- Break clause
- Repairing obligations
- Assignment and subletting
- Planning and licensing
- Handover condition
Decision matrix
A quick read on what matters most in the sample case.
| Area | Current signal | What would improve it | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent burden | 20.0% of expected revenue | Move closer to 12% if possible, or at least reduce pressure below the caution threshold. | High |
| Customer assumptions | 45.2 break-even/day vs 80 expected | Keep expected footfall and spend supported by evidence rather than optimism. | Medium |
| Upfront cash | £36,000 opening shortfall | Raise starting cash, lower setup costs, or negotiate landlord support. | High |
| Downside survival | No monthly burn in downside case, but opening cash fails | Fix the opening capital stack before focusing on operating burn. | High |
| Lease terms | Still worth checking carefully | Improve rent, deposit, break clause, service charge, and permitted use terms. | Medium |
| Missing evidence | Some assumptions are still redacted | Gather trading, cost, and lease evidence before signing. | Medium |
Final view
Pause unless the opening capital position improves.
The model does not fail because the downside month burns cash; it fails because upfront cash needed exceeds available starting cash.
The priority is to renegotiate fit-out, deposit, rent-free terms, landlord contribution, or increase available starting cash before treating the site as viable.
Next step
Run your own commercial check, then request the paid file if the site still looks worth pursuing.
The sample shows the kind of pressure-test, negotiation prompts, and due diligence structure that appears in the Standard commercial viability file.