Key points in this article
Why data leads our selection work
Many people picture site selection as one concrete move in a field. We break it into a full chain of checkable steps, and one conviction stays constant: data is more reliable than experience when conditions differ block by block across a growing city that keeps changing its own layout from one season to the next.
A stalled start and the fix
Once, site selection held up progress because responsibility was not pinned to a person on the ground. We then made a rule that data, not gut feeling, guides the call, and every single stall we later reviewed traced back to this step being missed by someone who assumed another team would handle it quietly.
Different stages, different focus
Feasibility leads early, stability during rollout, efficiency when mature. In places like Fusshan the mix of conditions demands stage-by-stage adjustment rather than one fixed ruler applied to every location without thoughtful consideration of the local reality we keep meeting on each visit to the site.
Before we commit to a location, we walk it with the future operator and note the small things a map cannot show on paper. Those notes feed straight into the plan, which is why our selections tend to age better than quick guesses made from a distance.