Consumer · AI · Legal strategy Ran Jul to Aug 2026

Campus Scout

A housing emergency in the family, turned into a working product and a real business plan

The problem

My brother-in-law had about a month to find off-campus housing near Cal State Fullerton. Listings are scattered across the university marketplace, Craigslist, roommate sites, and Facebook groups. Nothing ranks them against a student’s real constraints, and scammers target students on purpose.

I didn’t start with a pitch deck. I built the thing he needed.

What I built

A nightly scout, built with Claude Code. Every evening at 8pm it swept every source, dropped duplicates, checked that each listing was still live, scored scam risk, ranked by bike distance and budget, and emailed a report with a running shortlist and outreach drafts he could send as-is.

It ran 45 nights straight, through the day classes started. Along the way it caught wrong phone numbers and fake-cheap listings before a real person acted on them. One thing I didn’t expect: the binding constraint wasn’t price. In the final week, about half the new rooms near campus were female-only.

A real nightly report. The action list for that night, including a status reversal the scout caught

The running shortlist, tracked across nights with verified statuses

Each report closes with hotspots, a self-serve playbook, and scam safety rules

Then I asked if it was a product

A working prototype isn’t a business, so I scoped it like one: competitors, infrastructure costs, and California law. A couple things changed the whole shape of it.

California’s Prepaid Rental Listing Service law makes charging renters for listings a licensed activity, with a DRE license and a $10,000 bond behind it. So listings became the free tier, and the paid tier sells the tools around them (personalization, outreach drafting, scam screening), which the law exempts. The constraint and the growth strategy turned out to be the same design.

The other lever is cost. Researching once per campus and sharing that across every subscriber at the school brings the marginal AI cost to about $0.45 per user against a $19 subscription. The whole stack runs about a dollar a month at zero users.

Decisions I’d defend in an interview

DecisionThe tradeoff
Listings free, tools paidGave up the obvious revenue line to stay outside a licensing regime, and got a free growth engine in exchange
Research per campus, personalize per userMore pipeline complexity for a 5 to 8x drop in marginal cost
A $39 season pass that doesn’t renewStudents churn because they signed a lease. Pricing that expires matches how they actually buy, and it sidesteps California auto-renewal law
Defer the LLCCalifornia’s $800 a year franchise tax isn’t worth it for a free beta. The triggers for forming one are written down
Never scrapeAI search with citations, linking out to the source. Thinner data, but it avoids the pattern that cost Padmapper a $3.1M settlement

Where it stands

The scout found him a place he could have taken. For reasons outside the search he ended up going a different direction, but he’s housed, and the tool did what it was built to do. It stopped when the housing season did. The scoping report, legal analysis, decision log, and a phased roadmap with exit criteria are all done. If I pick it back up for next year’s cycle, the next step is a landing page and a small free beta at CSUF. Payments, the LLC, and other campuses are deferred on purpose.

← All projects