AccessCheck (working name)

Idea status: Idea stage · Target: an MRR ladder ($1k → $50k) instead of one fixed number · Verdict: No as described. Go only as honest EAA monitoring and evidence for EU web agencies · Last updated: 30 Sept 2026

Start here → WHAT-TO-DO-AND-AVOID.md: odds at each MRR level (with conditions, ~15 hrs/week / full-time: $1k ~45% / 60%, $5k ~18% / 28%, $10k ~9% / 16%, $20k ~4% / 8%), 13 do's, 14 avoids, checkpoints.

Origin: this idea came from the 30 Sept 2026 micro-SaaS research. It was assessed with the same brutal-honesty review as the other ideas in this portfolio.

Name: "AccessCheck" is a working name. Similar names are already used by accessibility tools, so check trademark (EUIPO and national registers) and domain before using it publicly.

Research was run on 30 Sept 2026, with a confidence level on each claim. See research/10-verified-research.md.

Folder layout

accesscheck/
├── WHAT-TO-DO-AND-AVOID.md      ← final analysis and decision (read first)
├── README.md                    ← this index
├── analysis/                    ← the investor-style assessment
│   ├── 00-one-page-brief.md
│   ├── 01-verdict.md
│   ├── 02-market-reality-check.md
│   ├── 03-feature-scrutiny.md
│   ├── 04-expanded-feature-catalog.md
│   ├── 05-pre-mortem.md
│   ├── 06-fundability.md
│   ├── 07-gaps.md
│   └── 09-assumptions-and-open-inputs.md
├── plans/                       ← execution plans
│   ├── 08-90-day-plan.md
│   └── 11-24-month-gated-roadmap.md
└── research/                    ← verified, cited evidence
    └── 10-verified-research.md

File numbers match the other ideas in this portfolio, so cross-references like "doc 08" work the same way.

Documents

#	Document	What it answers
—	WHAT-TO-DO-AND-AVOID.md	Final decision: MRR ladder, Tier A/B, conditions, customer math, 13 do's, 14 avoids, checkpoints
00	analysis/00-one-page-brief.md	The whole assessment on one page
01	analysis/01-verdict.md	MRR ladder for 4 versions of the idea and 2 time commitments, why there's no base rate, Tier A/B, fundable yes/no
02	analysis/02-market-reality-check.md	Buyer segments, the microenterprise exemption, pain scores, enforcement reality, competitors and pricing, market size
03	analysis/03-feature-scrutiny.md	The stated features and positioning, classified
04	analysis/04-expanded-feature-catalog.md	About 40 features buyers ask for, classified and prioritised
05	analysis/05-pre-mortem.md	Top 3 causes of death, warning signs, fixable?
06	analysis/06-fundability.md	Invest?, the skeptic's first 5 minutes, proof points, bootstrap vs raise
07	analysis/07-gaps.md	Gaps to pay, renew and refer, plus the legal and claims map
08	plans/08-90-day-plan.md	First 90 days, week by week, sized for limited weekly hours
09	analysis/09-assumptions-and-open-inputs.md	Assumptions made, and the inputs that would change the verdict
10	research/10-verified-research.md	Cited research (30 Sept 2026), confidence levels, conflicts, and what's still unverified
11	plans/11-24-month-gated-roadmap.md	Month 0–24 phases, gates, revenue path for both time commitments, budget guardrails

Caveat

Team, location, languages, hours per week and pricing were not provided. The assumptions are in analysis/09. No verified solo-founder revenue example exists for this kind of tool, and no confirmed EAA fine had been reported as of mid-2026. Several fine figures in circulation come from vendor blogs; the ones checked against primary law are marked in research/10.