LIVE on October 15th: Speaker Series 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. WATCH LIVE
LIVE on October 15th: Speaker Series 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

Market Potential

The Market Potential Jury reviews and evaluates team deliverables and the model home.


Team did a wonderfully thorough market analysis in their jury brief, and they had a great website design. Their home was designed and constructed well, as well as applicable to a wide market.

  • They presented the potential for both internship and mentorship opportunities.
  • We were intrigued by their three-part organizational structure, but we are concerned by how realistic it is to implement.
  • The on-site team articulated their pitch excellently.
  • Small affordable homes cannot support level of space and amenities depicted in their neighborhood model.
  • Their design made really efficient use of the building footprint.

They defined a large market that was served well by their customizable design and assembly. The team put together a strong jury brief and website.

  • Team was very knowledgeable and capable with their presentation
  • High ceiling increased the perceived volume of the structure, giving it a more “homey” feel.
  • The use of SIP’s is taking advantage of an existing technology, but the team could have communicated more about the advantages over traditional wood frame construction.
  • Website was visually appealing and an easy interface to navigate.
  • They should rethink their floor plan designs for furnishability.
  • Handcrafted downlights gave the kitchen and great room personality.

Lack of input from team members did not give us enough background to adequately judge this project. We appreciate the jury brief, but the website did not give enough information about the business plan or market potential.

  • Strong concept of Indoor-Outdoor living.
  • Lack of furnishings made spaces difficult to understand. Work from home concept was not demonstrated.
  • Don’t be afraid to use renderings to understand your vision.
  • Defining a more specific market niche would be helpful for design.

We love this team’s program for education in the construction industry. The demand for these types of skills is hard to overstate.

  • Not as sure about defined niche market to fit their home design.
  • Suggested retail price of 850,000 does not meet market’s needs
  • The market analysis provided was helpful, but did not support 850,000 house.
  • We appreciated the creative loft design, but the it compromised the sense of volume in the interior.
  • We wish the students had been given more of an opportunity to talk about their project.

Project was difficult to judge without necessary jury brief, and the website lacked clear information about the project. The On-Site team presented project and concepts well.

  • 2 bed 2 bath ADU is very marketable across the state. The common room has a “real home” feel
  • Smart home appliances and features were thoughtful and appealing to a wide market.
  • Furnishings helped demonstrate market acceptability of the home
  • We liked that they plan to use the home for educational demonstrations in the future.
  • We would have loved to see more feedback from potential residents on the material choice.

The team’s flexible design and ease of assembly make their product applicable to a very wide market. The large variety of floor plan options gives huge opportunity to a wide variety of needs. Very thrilled to see where the project is going and who it was designed for.

  • Very scalable project, software and fabrication touls enable great design flexibility
  • The fact that the home can be field constructed and not trucked to the site will save costs.
  • They clearly demonstrated deep partner relationships in the supply chain and service providers.
  • Like the idea of selling component parts (like the bike shed) as a market opportunity
  • The jury brief and the website were very through and assistive in our analysis
  • The design and layout were very efficient for the intended use.
  • Knowing the team had a specific site in mind is a very great sign of real market potential.

Interesting concept, but no jury brief or website was provided for the jury to make an informed decision.

  • We see a lot of potential in temporary natural disaster relief or workforce housing, but it was not the market the team designed for.
  • Unsure based on the material provided of the long-term durability or thermal performance of the structure.

They defined their market niche well and designed to it. We really liked the novelty of being able to put the house on any lot and to be self-sufficient. The idea of a greenhouse can provide so many attributes to the livability of the property.

  • They pushed beyond the building itself to consider the entire site and sulved water and energy problems.
  • The use of the greenhouse expanded the indoor-outdoor aspect of the project.
  • Intelligently connected work from home lifestyle with idealistic 1960s off-grid vision.
  • There are aspects of the project implementation that scale beyond their specific use case.
  • Team clearly had a coherent vision and good presentation.
  • Successful team dynamic.

This contest evaluates how prepared and well-positioned each team is to deliver energy efficient, resilient, sustainable, and affordable solutions to and for the California housing market in the 5–10 years following the competition. The range of possible solutions includes but is not limited to the research, design, development, construction, installation, manufacturing and/or sale of residential buildings, landscapes, systems, technologies, and/or products. Positive outcomes resulting from recent, current, and future activities in the areas of education, outreach, community service, market research, activism, code development, and more are also recognized in this contest.

The cumulative potential impact of each team’s solution(s) over the 5-to-10-year time horizon can be estimated in terms of quantity of units sold, lives improved, patents granted, clients served, energy/water/resources/money saved, students taught, building codes amended, etc.

A jury of qualified professionals will assign an overall score for each team’s potential to impact California’s housing sector in positive ways. The jury will consider team deliverables and perform an on-site evaluation of the model home. The jury will consider the following criteria:

  1. How effectively did the team use market analysis to identify unmet market needs and/or problems requiring solutions?
  2. How successful has the team been in identifying post-competition opportunities and preparing to capitalize on those opportunities?
  3. How well does the model home and the team’s other project activities and outcomes to date demonstrate the team’s ability to respond effectively to identified market needs and develop solutions to identified problems in the 5–10 years following the competition?
  4. What size impact are the team’s endeavors likely to have on California’s housing market in the 5–10 years following the competition?
  5. To what extent will the team’s likely impact on the California housing market help California meet its need for housing options that are carbon-free, energy efficient, resilient, sustainable, and affordable?
In addition to and separate from the score assigned to each team for the Market Potential Contest, the jury will assign each team a score for innovation. This score will become one-fifth of the total score for the Innovation Contest. The jury will consider the following questions:
  1. How innovative was the team’s approach to identifying an existing market need and defining its target market?
  2. How innovative was the team’s approach to measuring the potential market impact of its model home at the competition and/or its post-competition business activities.
  3. How innovative is the team’s proposed solution to meet the identified market need?

Kris Maher

Kevin Casey

Tyler Pullen