Building StudioBase in Public: Why We Chose Zero Commission
I made a decision early on with StudioBase that feels obvious in retrospect but actually gets questioned by almost every advisor I talk to.
"You're not taking a commission on transactions?"
The tone is always the same. Disbelief mixed with confusion. Like I've left money on the table.
"No," I say. "Zero commission."
Then they ask the inevitable question: "How do you make money?"
And that conversation usually goes one of two ways. Either they think I'm naive and haven't figured out monetization. Or they think I'm being naive and haven't figured out how normal SaaS works.
Here's the thing: I chose this intentionally. And I want to explain why, because it matters for how we're building StudioBase, and it matters for how I think about studio owners.
The Commission Business Model#
Let me start with what you probably already know: most booking software companies make money the same way.
MindBody does. Zen does. Vagaro does. Mariana Tek does. They charge a base subscription ($50–$600/month depending on the platform), and then they take a cut of every transaction. Typically 2–5%, sometimes more.
If you're a yoga studio doing $8,000 in monthly bookings, that's $160–$400 in commission on top of your base fee. For an active personal training studio? That can push $1,000+.
The economics are pretty elegant, if you're the software company. The bigger your customers get, the more money you make. You have built-in incentive to help them grow. What could go wrong?
Well. Everything.
The Misaligned Incentive#
Here's the uncomfortable truth nobody says out loud: when you're taking commission, you have an incentive for your customers to succeed. But you have a bigger incentive for them to process volume through you.
It's subtle. But it matters.
If a studio owner is deliberating between launching a 4-week specialty workshop series (higher-value, lower-volume classes) versus running 6 back-to-back classes per week to maximize transaction volume, the commission model creates a bias toward volume.
You might not do this consciously. The engineers building the product aren't twirling their mustaches thinking, "How do we incentivize high-volume, low-margin classes?" But the incentive structure is there. Volume equals revenue for the platform.
Now, sometimes high volume is what the studio owner wants. They're optimizing for cash flow, student engagement, teacher employment. Great.
But sometimes it's not. Sometimes the studio owner would be happier and more profitable running 20 high-value classes per week than 40 lower-value ones. Commission-based models create a subtle pressure in the other direction.
When I was building StudioBase, I kept coming back to conversations with studio owners. They'd talk about switching to commission-free platforms if they could find one.
Not because they were philosophically opposed to paying fees. But because they were tired of feeling like their booking software was nudging them toward choices that benefited the platform more than the studio.
Why This Happened#
I realized something while researching the market: every studio owner I talked to felt a low-level resentment about commission fees.
Not anger. Just... weariness.
"It's one more cut. I'm already paying Stripe. I'm already paying the app. And now every time a student books, they're skimming money off the top."
One studio owner compared it to how restaurants feel about delivery platforms. You're paying them to bring customers. They're taking 30%. And you're still making the pizza. You're doing the work. You're taking the risk.
The platform is just... handling the transaction. Skimming.
I kept hearing variations of this:
- "By the time I factor in all my costs, I'm not sure booking software is actually helping my bottom line."
- "I feel like I'm funding their product development by running transactions."
- "I'd rather pay them a flat fee and keep the money my students pay me."
That last one stuck with me. Because it's obvious once you hear it. The student is paying the studio. The studio should keep that money. The booking software should charge the studio a service fee if it's worth it. That's transparent. That's aligned.
The Math#
Let me do the actual math on what it feels like to be a studio owner using a commission-based platform.
Scenario: A Pilates Studio
- Class rate: $25 per student
- Capacity: 25 students per class
- Schedule: 20 classes per week
- Monthly bookings: 2,000 classes × $25 = $50,000
Now, let's cost it out with a typical commission-based platform:
| Item | Monthly Cost |
|---|---|
| Subscription (MindBody premium) | $300 |
| Commission (2% on $50k) | $1,000 |
| Payment processing (Stripe through platform: 2.9% + $0.30) | $1,550 |
| Total Software Cost | $2,850 |
That's 5.7% of revenue going to the booking software ecosystem. For a studio operating on 40–50% margins (typical for small studios), that's cutting into profit material.
Now, let's look at how it feels with StudioBase at $59/month (Growth plan):
| Item | Monthly Cost |
|---|---|
| StudioBase subscription | $59 |
| Payment processing (Stripe direct: 2.9% + $0.30) | $1,550 |
| Total Software Cost | $1,609 |
That's 3.2% of revenue. A difference of $1,241 per month.
For a small studio, that's the difference between hiring another part-time instructor, or upgrading your sound system, or actually taking home a livable profit.
But here's what's important: I'm not the hero of this story just because I cut the percentage. The real point is that when your interests are aligned, you can be honest about costs.
You pay a flat fee. You know what it is. You know why. There's no incentive for either of us to push you toward something that doesn't serve you.
The Hard Part#
Here's where I'm going to be honest about why this isn't easy.
Zero commission means my growth is decoupled from studio growth. If a studio owner doubles their revenue, that doesn't double my revenue. I'm still making $59/month.
A commission-based business scales faster (in theory). Your revenue grows with your customers. It's an elegant model. It makes investors happy.
But I'm not interested in elegant models that create misaligned incentives. I'm interested in building a product that studio owners actually want to use, not one that passively nudges them toward behaviors that benefit the platform.
So here's what zero commission forces you to do: build something genuinely useful enough that people keep paying for it.
Not because you're taking their money on transactions whether they like it or not. But because they wake up and think, "This is worth $59."
That's a higher bar. It has to be.
It means:
- The onboarding has to be actually simple
- The product has to handle 80% of real studio owner use cases
- Support has to be responsive
- The feature roadmap has to be driven by what helps studios, not what extracts more value
- Pricing has to be transparent and fair
Honestly? That's harder to build. But it's the version of the product I want to use. And it's the version that studio owners have been asking for.
What Changes#
When you're not taking commission, a few things become clearer.
First: I actually want your studio to succeed. I want you to run high-margin classes. I want you to build a business that doesn't feel like you're constantly squeezed by SaaS costs. Because if you succeed, you'll keep paying for the booking software that helped you get there.
Second: I can be honest about what the software can and can't do. I don't have to pretend it's an all-in-one solution that handles email, accounting, inventory, and your entire business. It does booking. It does payments. It does that really well. Use other tools for other things.
Third: We can optimize for your happiness, not transaction volume. A studio that runs 5 classes and 100% books through StudioBase is a success to me. A studio running 50 classes and bouncing between platforms is not.
Fourth: I'm building this as a founder. I care about the product I'm putting into the world. I'm not accountable to investors who want hockey-stick growth. I'm accountable to studio owners who are depending on this to work.
What This Means For You#
If you're evaluating booking software, this is what I'd ask you to pay attention to:
Who benefits when you succeed?
If your booking platform makes money when you process transactions, their growth is aligned with transaction volume. That's not evil. It's just a fact. Understand it.
If your booking platform makes money from a flat subscription, their growth is aligned with keeping you happy. No funny incentives.
Neither is magic. Both require building good software. But the incentive structure matters for the long term.
I chose zero commission because I think booking software should be a tool that serves you, not a partner that's quietly nudging your business in certain directions.
You opened a studio to teach. Not to maximize transaction volume. Not to feed platform growth. To teach.
Your booking software should stay out of the way and let you do that.
Building in Public#
Why am I telling you this?
Honestly, because I think more SaaS companies should be honest about how they make money and what incentives that creates. And because I'm building StudioBase in public. You should know who I am and how I think.
I'm betting on the idea that studio owners want to pay a fair price for fair tools, and that being honest about that is an advantage.
If you're running a studio and you're tired of feeling like booking software is nickel-and-diming you, StudioBase might be worth trying. We're doing a 14-day free trial, no credit card. Build your booking page, invite a few students, see if it works for you.
But more importantly: think about the platforms you're using. Think about the incentive structure. Think about who benefits when you succeed.
That's how you find tools that actually serve you.
What do you think? Are commission fees a deal-breaker for you, or just part of doing business? Hit me up—genuinely curious what other studio owners are thinking about this.
StudioBase: Booking software designed for your studio, not a transaction fee machine. 14-day free trial. No credit card.