Third-party delivery commissions vs. your own online ordering: the cost math
DoorDash, Uber Eats, and Grubhub take 15–30% of every order. Your own direct checkout costs $25–$750/month depending on complexity. Here's what the economics look like for a Cheyenne restaurant doing 120 orders a week.
Every order that comes through a third-party app extracts a fixed percentage. Every order through your own checkout extracts $0.00 in commission.
A 120-seat restaurant in Cheyenne averaging 120 online orders per week is doing about $720/week in takeout revenue (assuming $60 average ticket). If that restaurant uses a third-party delivery platform, it pays somewhere between 15–30% of that in commissions — $108 to $216 every single week. Over a year, that's $5,616 to $11,232 in fees on a single revenue stream.
Your own online ordering system with direct checkout to your bank account costs $25 to $750 per month depending on whether you're starting simple or need a full booking engine, inventory, multi-location admin, and API integrations. That's $300 to $9,000 per year, against a commission model that's eating $5,600 to $11,000 off the top of that same channel.
The question isn't whether you should have online ordering — every restaurant needs it now, regardless of size or location. The question is who takes the commission, and whether the gap between platform fees and owned infrastructure is large enough to justify the switch.
What third-party platforms actually charge
DoorDash, Uber Eats, and Grubhub all publish fee structures, though the exact percentages vary by metro, restaurant category, and contract terms. A typical breakdown includes:
- Commission on food: Usually 15–30% of the order subtotal, this is the main revenue stream for the platform and the biggest cost for you.
- Delivery fee: Varies, but the restaurant typically covers a portion or all of this to stay competitive.
- Payment processing: The platform often batches and handles credit card processing, adding another 3–5% on top if you're not absorbing it in the base commission already.
- Service fees: Per-transaction or per-order charges depending on the agreement.
- Promotional spending: Many platforms require or encourage restaurants to pay into discounts and promos to stay visible in the app ranking.
A Laramie pizza place running 100 third-party orders per week at an average $50 ticket should calculate their exposure carefully. If half of that is pizza (where margins are thinner) and the platform takes 25%, that's $625 a week walking out the door. That's the cost of a full-time delivery driver, or three months' hosting and development for a direct-order system.
What you pay for with your own ordering system
Building or subscribing to your own ordering system costs money upfront and monthly, but the cost is fixed and doesn't scale with volume. Techtweek offers four tiers depending on what you need:
| Tier | Monthly Cost | What's Included |
|---|---|---|
| System Starter | $150 | Menu, direct ordering, basic checkout. Good for restaurants starting out. |
| Custom Portal | $350 | Everything above + appointment booking, customer accounts, intake forms. |
| Full Operations App | $750 | Full portal + multi-location admin, inventory, job ticketing, advanced integrations. |
| Site Hosting | $25 | Managed hosting, SSL, daily backups, uptime monitoring (add-on to any tier). |
The lowest cost entry is $150/month ($1,800/year) for a basic ordering system. That breakeven point — where you're spending less on your own infrastructure than you're losing to third-party commission — hits around 75–100 orders per week for most restaurants, depending on average ticket and margin. A restaurant doing 120 orders weekly at $60 average ticket breaks even in about three months.
The hidden costs of the platform model
Visibility and ranking. Third-party apps use algorithmic ranking to decide which restaurants show up first. Good rankings often correlate with promotional spending, discounting, and fast delivery times — all things the platform can incentivize. A restaurant that wants to stay visible sometimes has to spend more than the base commission to keep competitive, especially in Cheyenne during off-season when there's less traffic on the apps.
Customer data lock-in. Every customer who orders through DoorDash belongs to DoorDash's data model. You get a phone number and maybe an email, but the repeat-order relationship is owned by the app, not your business. With your own ordering system, every customer becomes part of your retention engine — you can text them, email them, and build loyalty without a platform middleman.
Rate changes and contract renegotiation. Platform commissions aren't set in stone. Uber and DoorDash have both raised commission rates multiple times in the last five years in markets where they dominate. Once you're dependent on the platform, renegotiating from a position of weakness is tough.
Exclusivity clauses. Some platform contracts contain clauses preventing restaurants from offering better pricing or faster service through direct channels. Read the fine print. Your own ordering system lets you price and deliver however you want.
The break-even math: If you're doing 120 orders a week at $60 average ticket and paying 20% commission, you're losing $1,440/month to the platform. A $350/month Custom Portal pays for itself in about 9 days and saves you $11,040 a year. For restaurants in Jackson, Cody, Sheridan, or anywhere else with seasonal revenue spikes, that math gets even tighter — a platform takes the same percentage during a slow Tuesday and a busy rodeo Saturday, but your own system spreads the cost flat across both.
The practical middle ground
Some restaurants run both. They use a third-party platform for discoverability and new customer acquisition — which has real value, especially in a new market — while also operating their own ordering system for direct customers and repeat orders. The logic is sound: pay the platform to find new customers, then convert them to your owned channel.
That's the model a Casper restaurant with strong local loyalty but thin margins might use — be on the apps during the tourist season or a big event, then reduce presence in slow periods and push your own ordering for the repeat local base.
Another approach is to use a platform primarily for delivery, not ordering. If you're already staffed and equipped to handle pickup or dine-in orders through your own system, paying a delivery platform only for the logistics piece (instead of a full commission on the entire order) changes the math — you're paying for delivery labor, not for the restaurant's entire margin to be extracted.
Why the choice matters now
Five years ago, being on the apps was optional and beneficial. Today, customers expect it. But the difference between a restaurant that treats the app as a customer acquisition channel and one that treats it as the primary ordering infrastructure is the difference between $11,000/year in savings and $11,000/year in fees.
A restaurant with a solid local base, predictable traffic, and the ability to market itself directly to customers has little reason to stay dependent on a platform's commission model. A restaurant in a smaller market without a strong brand or customer list yet has good reason to use the platform for reach, as long as the plan includes moving those customers to a direct channel.
Whichever model you choose, own it intentionally. Don't use a third-party platform because you assume online ordering is too complicated to build yourself — it isn't, and the cost is flat and knowable. And don't skip the platform entirely if you're in a new market or a low-discoverability location — the commission is a real cost, but so is being nowhere online.
Ready to move orders off the platform?
We'll build the ordering system that fits your restaurant's size and growth plan — with direct checkout straight to your bank account.
Request System Scope →