Cyberbacker vs Snapchef INITIAL NY FRANCHISE FILINGSnapchef

We target Cyberbacker. The immediate reason is install base: 57 total units, 33 of them franchised, all currently operating. That’s a real, if shrinking, addressable market for POS, scheduling, and back-office tools—accounts we can sell into this quarter. Snapchef, by contrast, has zero franchised units and a dormant FDD. There is no franchisee to call, no royalty-driven urgency to standardize ops. A dormant filing signals they aren’t actively selling territories, so a pipeline of new units won’t materialize soon. In software sales, a negative-growth territory you can harvest today beats a theoretical one you can’t touch.

The tradeoff is terrain quality versus TAM timing. Snapchef’s unit investment range ($138K–$198K) suggests better per-unit budget and possibly more complex ops—ripe for automation spend if units existed. Cyberbacker’s lower investment ($52K–$85K) means tighter margins per deal, and the -36.5% YoY unit loss signals a brand in contraction, which can suppress upgrade appetite. But the 33 franchised locations are a monetizable base right now, and the overdue FDD may even indicate operational reliance on the franchisor—a pain point our back-office module could exploit. Nothing else in Snapchef’s profile compensates for an empty pipeline.

Verdict: Cyberbacker is the stronger opportunity because a declining fleet of 57 units buys software today; a dormant four-unit concept with zero franchisees does not.