Sitebase: End-to-End Diligence on a Construction PropTech Bet
Sourced and evaluated a 360-camera construction tech startup, running primary customer research to test must-have versus nice-to-have.
Abhinav Sohani
Analyst at Anthill Ventures
From their time as
Analyst
Anthill Ventures • 2025
Overview
Abhinav sourced Sitebase independently and took the deal through full diligence and IC approval. The company had built a 360-camera-based construction site monitoring platform, already established in the US and Europe, but entering India as a relatively new category.
The Story
Abhinav sourced Sitebase independently and took the deal through full diligence and IC approval. The company had built a 360-camera-based construction site monitoring platform, already established in the US and Europe, but entering India as a relatively new category.
He started with a founder call and product demo, then spent roughly a week mapping the Indian market, sizing the TAM, SAM, and SOM for a space that had limited local precedent. Once he had a working view of the market, he went directly to customers rather than relying on the founder's framing.
He spoke to the chief engineering officer and a project manager at L&T, one based in Chennai and one in Mumbai. The manager's core pain point was having to travel to Chennai every few weeks to check site progress because photos were not sufficient. Sitebase's day-by-day 3D site model solved that directly. The Chennai-based engineering officer valued the ability to track delivery timelines remotely.
The key question Abhinav was testing was whether this was a must-have or a nice-to-have. His concern was that early-stage customers might try the product and drop it before it became habitual. L&T confirmed the product worked but flagged pricing as a barrier to conversion. He took that feedback back to the founder, who explained the server cost structure behind the pricing.
Abhinav also sourced his own customer conversation at MyHome through a personal LP connection. MyHome ran multiple projects in the same city, making adoption structurally easier. They had used a US-based equivalent before and were specifically looking for a localized Indian product.
He connected both L&T and MyHome directly with the founder for pilot runs. Six months later, both came back as paying customers, with L&T locked into a five-year deal at a reduced rate that the founder structured to prioritize long-term retention over upfront revenue. MyHome paid a premium per square foot given their use case. That pilot conversion was the primary validation that moved the deal to IC approval and into term sheet negotiation.
L&T was priced at approximately 1.2 to 1.8 rupees per square foot depending on project scope. MyHome was comfortable at approximately 2.5 rupees per square foot.