Mayflower logo

Mayflower

AI plug-in that automates HR immigration screening and compliance

Fall 2025active2025Website
GovTechLegalTechImmigration
Sponsored
Documenso logo

Documenso

Open source e-signing

The open source DocuSign alternative. Beautiful, modern, and built for developers.

Learn more →
?

Your Company Here

Sponsor slot available

Want to be listed as a sponsor? Reach thousands of founders and developers.

Report from 12 days ago

What do they actually do

Mayflower provides fee-for-service preparation of U.S. work visa petitions, focused on O‑1A/O‑1B and TN categories. They collect the applicant’s information and evidence, draft forms and petition memos, organize exhibits, and deliver a ready‑to‑file case package Mayflower website.

The public flow is: book a consultation, complete intake and document collection, and receive a prepared petition. The site emphasizes speed (marketing a turnaround of roughly a week once all info is complete) and “ready‑to‑file cases,” but it is not explicit whether Mayflower submits filings to USCIS or hands the packet to the client or an attorney to file Mayflower website.

Who are their target customer(s)

  • International tech/professional applicants (engineers, researchers, data scientists) seeking O‑1A or TN: They need a strong petition on tight timelines to meet start dates but struggle to convert CVs, publications, and project work into USCIS‑ready evidence; long back‑and‑forth with lawyers risks missed deadlines.
  • Artists and creative professionals pursuing O‑1B: Evidence is fragmented across press, reviews, and portfolios, and packaging subjective achievements plus expert letters into a cohesive legal case is opaque and time‑consuming.
  • Early‑stage startups hiring international talent: Founders need hires onboard quickly but lack dedicated immigration support; slow petition prep delays hiring and disrupts product timelines.
  • Small to mid‑size company HR teams handling one‑off visas: They lack immigration specialists and fear inconsistent filings or missing documents; they want predictable, audit‑ready packages without micromanaging the process.
  • Solo immigration attorneys or small law firms: They are overloaded with drafting and document assembly for O‑1/TN cases and want reliable outsourcing for time‑consuming preparation while retaining case control and billing.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

  • First 10: Founder‑led pilots from existing networks (YC startups, hiring managers with imminent start dates, select artists) with discounted, expedited paid engagements in exchange for tight timelines and public case studies.
  • First 50: Onboard solo/small immigration firms as white‑label/reseller partners with revenue share, plus targeted outreach to startup HR and founders via LinkedIn/Slack; require references and case studies to speed trust and sales cycles.
  • First 100: Launch self‑serve intake and an employer dashboard that outputs ready‑to‑file packets; add a paid referral program for attorneys/incubators/HR and a small LinkedIn ads budget, supported by turnkey playbooks for integrating the service into hiring workflows.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

USCIS recorded roughly 10,010 O‑1 and 13,700 TN petitions in FY2023, or about 23.7k petitions annually in Mayflower’s focus categories USCIS FY2023 report.

Bottom-up calculation:

Using representative market fees (O‑1 often ~$6k–$12k; TN ~$2k–$3.5k), the full‑conversion revenue range is about $87.5M–$168.1M per year for O‑1+TN combined Manifest O‑1 fees XU Law O‑1 cost Manifest TN fees Jang TN fees. A more realistic served TAM assumes partial adoption via paid prep; e.g., 40%–60% uptake at ~$5k–$6k blended price implies roughly $47M–$85M/year.

Assumptions:

  • Counts use FY2023 USCIS O‑1 and TN receipts as demand proxies.
  • Blended pricing reflects a mix of higher‑priced O‑1s and lower‑priced TNs based on published fee ranges.
  • Only a portion of TN filers purchase paid preparation; scenarios assume 40%–60% paid adoption rather than 100%.

Who are some of their notable competitors