Every caterer who signs up for a national ordering marketplace eventually asks the same question: how much of this order actually reaches my kitchen? The answer depends entirely on the platform's fee model, and the gap between a percentage-of-order commission and a flat per-lead charge can be the difference between a healthy margin and a break-even month. Here is what the two most-cited marketplace structures — ezCater and CaterCow — actually charge, and how caterers weigh that cost against what the platform brings in return.
How ezCater's Commission Structure Works
ezCater's marketplace model is built around a per-order commission rather than a flat listing fee. Industry reporting puts the typical rate at approximately 15% of the order total, layered on top of standard credit card processing fees in the 2.75% to 2.99% range. That baseline isn't fixed for every caterer: depending on order volume, featured placement, and the specific partner agreement, reported commission rates range anywhere from 10% up to 20%, with some higher-tier arrangements cited as high as 30%. Caterers who route orders through ezOrdering — effectively using ezCater's checkout technology embedded on their own website rather than the open marketplace — report a meaningfully lower rate, around 7% plus processing, since the platform isn't the one that sourced the customer.
CaterCow and the Flat vs. Percentage Divide
CaterCow operates on a similar percentage-of-payout logic, with reported deductions in the 11% to 16% range per order. That puts it modestly below ezCater's headline marketplace rate, though the practical difference narrows once processing fees and platform-specific terms are factored in. The broader alternative to either model is a flat-fee structure: direct-ordering platforms priced as a monthly subscription, in the roughly $119 to $328 per month range cited in industry comparisons, charge no per-order commission at all. The tradeoff is structural, not just financial — a subscription tool handles the ordering technology but does not source new corporate buyers the way a marketplace does. Some direct catering software goes further, advertising 0% commission paired with a flat monthly fee, but again shifts the demand-generation burden entirely onto the caterer.
What Commission Actually Costs at Volume
Percentage fees compound quickly once a caterer has real marketplace volume. A caterer generating $20,000 a month in orders through a 15% marketplace commission is paying roughly $3,000 a month, or about $36,000 a year, before processing fees are even added. That is a meaningful number against an industry-typical profit margin frequently cited around 5% — a margin thin enough that commission-heavy months can push a catering operation close to break-even territory.
| Fee model | Typical rate | Best fit |
|---|---|---|
| ezCater marketplace | ~15% (range 10–20%, up to 30% in some tiers) + 2.75–2.99% processing | Caterers without existing corporate demand who need new-buyer sourcing |
| ezOrdering (own site) | ~7% + processing | Caterers driving their own traffic but wanting marketplace checkout tech |
| CaterCow marketplace | ~11–16% deducted from payout | Similar use case to ezCater, modestly lower headline rate |
| Flat monthly subscription / direct ordering | ~$119–$328/month, 0% commission | Established caterers with steady, self-generated volume |
Where Caterers Push Back
The recurring complaint in caterer feedback isn't the existence of a commission — it's where that commission gets applied. A frequently cited frustration is paying full commission on repeat orders from the same corporate customer, even when that customer is ordering directly off a caterer's own menu inside the marketplace, on the reasoning that the platform didn't actually re-source that sale. Some caterers also note they cannot mark up marketplace prices to offset the commission, which locks in the fee as a straight margin hit rather than a cost that can be passed along. On the other side of the ledger, caterers who lack an existing sales pipeline for corporate catering often describe the commission as a reasonable trade for time savings, centralized invoicing, and inbound volume they would otherwise have to build from scratch.
Commission vs. Flat-Lead: Which Actually Costs Less
The honest answer is that it depends on volume consistency, not on which fee number looks smaller on paper. For a caterer with unpredictable or seasonal corporate demand, a percentage commission scales with revenue — there's no fee in a slow month. For a caterer with steady, established volume, that same percentage becomes an increasingly expensive tax on business the platform is no longer really generating, and a flat monthly fee or flat per-lead cost becomes the more profitable structure over time, since the caterer keeps a larger share of every order once past the platform's break-even point. The catch is that flat-fee and direct-ordering models transfer the demand-generation work back to the caterer, along with ownership of the customer relationship and data that a pure commission marketplace typically keeps to itself.
For most catering operations, the practical move isn't choosing one model exclusively but understanding which orders are actually costing the most in commission — particularly repeat corporate accounts — and deciding, order type by order type, whether a marketplace's sourcing power is still earning its cut.