This preview shows the shape of the paid comparison pack: structured comparison, side-by-side evidence, watch-outs, and a full Site Intelligence memo for each candidate.
Executive direction
A
recommended
Stronger residential demand, better errand-stack fit, and weaker immediate competitors - subject to rent and access diligence.
944 Johnson St, Victoria, BC
82
score
Stronger shortlist candidate based on public signals
Why it scores
Diligence flags
Douglas & Fort, Victoria, BC
68
score
Viable, with weaker durability signals
Why it scores
Diligence flags
Residential demand
Site ASite A benefits from visible new-unit pipeline and stronger all-day demand.
Competitor vulnerability
Site AImmediate chain competition appears weaker around Site A.
Office/daypart traffic
Site BSite B has stronger weekday office exposure.
Execution risk
Site ASite A has fewer concept-positioning constraints, pending lease economics.
Each candidate gets its own Site Intelligence memo, not just a row in a table.
The pack separates data-backed findings from lease, access, and operating assumptions you must verify offline.
Use the memo to challenge broker claims, plan site visits, and avoid committing to the weaker option.
Compare two locations for $89 or three for $129. You get the executive comparison plus the underlying Site Intelligence memo for every candidate.
