Our Top Cases of 2026
Quick answer: This post covers the three Japan market entry engagement shapes we see most — a lean SaaS founder on a Startup Visa runway, a real multi-location restaurant-group expansion we co-invested in, and an enterprise subsidiary rollout — from 3 months to first operations to a multi-year, seven-location partnership. It's a closer look at what we actually do, not a ranked list of named clients.
A note on what "our cases" means here
Quick answer: Cases A and C are anonymized patterns reflecting real budget ranges, scopes, and timelines from actual engagement shapes. Case B is a real, specific engagement — our deepest to date — described qualitatively, with deal terms kept private. We'd rather publish two honest patterns and one real story than pad this list.
Case A: Lean SaaS founder — Startup Visa runway
Quick answer: An overseas IT/SaaS startup founder used the municipality-sponsored Startup Visa to enter Japan with ¥3.5M initial investment and ¥450K/month ongoing, landing in 3–6 months without needing to meet the Business Manager visa's ¥30 million capital threshold up front.
This pattern is designed as a 2-year runway to test the Japan market before committing full capital — the Startup Visa's eligibility and timeline depend on local government review (typically 5–6 months total for that specific approval), during which the founder builds business activity records. Scope included incorporation, a professionally certified business plan for municipality matching, monthly municipality compliance check-ins, bank account and Stripe setup, contract localization, and a first country manager hire. Transitioning to a full Business Manager visa in year two requires the same ¥30 million paid-in capital and one full-time qualifying employee we cover in our renewal and checklist posts — our team supports that transition when the time comes.
One client quote published alongside this pattern on our site captures the timeline compression founders describe: "I landed in Tokyo on a Friday, opened our bank account on Tuesday, and ran payroll by month-end. Three months earlier I was Googling 'how to get a Business Manager visa' at 2am." — European SaaS founder, Series A, operational in 14 weeks.
Case B: Multi-location F&B expansion — a real, ongoing partnership
Quick answer: Our deepest engagement to date is a real one: a multi-location, Australian-founded restaurant group we co-invested in and helped scale across seven locations in Tokyo between December 2023 and early 2026 — spanning site acquisition, construction coordination, equipment, and ongoing financial operations support.
This one is different from the anonymized patterns on either side of it, in two ways. First, it's a named-shape real engagement, not a pattern: seven restaurant openings across Shinjuku, Okubo, Takadanobaba, Ueno, Asakusa, and Ikebukuro, with Smart Contents involved continuously rather than handing off after setup — including day-to-day financial tracking for locations in operation. Second, the structure is different: we're a co-investor and operating partner in parts of this expansion, not an arms-length consultant, which is why it runs deeper than a typical fee-for-service engagement. We keep the specific deal terms private, but the shape of it is the point: market entry didn't end at incorporation — it compounded, location by location, inside one relationship.
It's also the clearest real example of what we mean by full-cycle support: entry and operations work first, with IT tooling and subsidy workstreams becoming available inside the same relationship as the group's Japan footprint grew.
Case C: Enterprise Japan subsidiary
Quick answer: An enterprise-scale global rollout invested ¥18M initially and ¥2M/month ongoing, reaching steady-state operations in 12–24 months — the scope here shifts from setup logistics to entry strategy, M&A target sourcing, transfer pricing and APA design, executive headhunting, and GAAP conversion (JGAAP to IFRS).
This is the pattern for companies where Japan isn't a first market test but a formal subsidiary of an already-large global operation — the scope includes IT security and ISMS/J-SOX compliance and an enterprise inside-sales build, reflecting the governance and compliance depth expected at that scale.
A related published quote: "The PE-risk diagnostic alone paid for the engagement. We were one step away from PE recognition that would have taken 30% of Asia profit. They flagged it at kickoff." — SEA-based global PMO, NYSE-listed, HQ Singapore.
Which pattern is closest to your situation?
Quick answer: If you're testing Japan without committing full capital yet, Case A's Startup Visa pathway is the closest match. If you're a consumer-facing or multi-location operator planning a physical footprint in Japan, Case B shows what a deep, ongoing operating partnership can look like. If you're standing up a formal subsidiary of an established global company, Case C's enterprise scope — and its 12–24 month steady-state timeline — is the honest comparison.
See published pricing by stage to build a estimate against your own specifics rather than one of these three patterns directly — every engagement is scoped individually.
FAQ
Are these real clients, or composites? Case B is a real, specific engagement, described qualitatively with deal terms kept private. Cases A and C are anonymized patterns based on real engagement shapes and figures published on our site — not invented composites, but not named clients either.
Why only three cases? Because that's what we currently publish. We'd rather describe two real patterns and one real partnership accurately than pad this list with invented examples to look more comprehensive than our published case material actually is.
Do these budget ranges include government fees? No — per our published disclaimers, government fees and certain third-party costs are billed separately from these initial/monthly figures.
If your planned entry doesn't map cleanly onto any of these three patterns, get in touch for a scoped estimate.
Budget figures, timelines, and quotes for Cases A and C are drawn directly from case and testimonial material already published on our site as of July 2026. Case B describes a real, ongoing engagement qualitatively; its commercial terms are intentionally not disclosed.