Pay As You Grow

"Pay as you grow" — commission-based pricing option

0. The three rules this copy obeys

1. Why the term is worth ranking for, even without a rate

The fixed-tier model structurally excludes the largest segment of this market: someone with no revenue yet cannot commit to €99/month before their first transaction. So they search for the model that matches their situation — "no monthly fee", "commission only", "pay per transaction". Those queries exist in volume precisely because almost every vendor answers them with a subscription page.

The missing rate costs almost nothing in SEO terms. The search intent lives in the model, not the number: nobody types "2% marketplace commission". They type "marketplace without subscription". A page that names the model in the visitor's own words ranks on those terms whether or not a figure is published, and competitor ads paying per click for the same intent make the organic slot more valuable, not less.

Where it should rank is worth being precise about. A pricing card carries three lines and will not rank for anything competitive. The realistic ranking home is the commission section of /cout-marketplace/, which already discusses per-transaction costs at length and is read by exactly this audience at exactly this moment. Card on the pricing area as requested, plus the model-comparison section drafted in §4 — the card captures intent that arrives, the cost page earns the ranking.

2. Card copy — three languages

Follows the existing tier-card structure, with an availability badge in place of the "most chosen" badge, and the setup-fee box kept exactly where the other cards have it.

🇫🇷 French

🇬🇧 English

🇳🇱 Dutch

Why line 4 is on the card and not in a footnote: a starter reading "no fixed monthly cost" concludes "free to start". Discovering a €500 setup fee after registering interest turns a warm lead into someone who feels misled — the most expensive kind of correction. Stated on the card, it costs a fraction of leads and keeps every one that remains.

3. Meta description updates — home page

The model terms belong in the home page description, since that is the URL that will surface for pricing-model queries. Note the commission claim is scoped in the same sentence, which is the only way to mention both without contradiction.

FR (156 chars)

Plateforme marketplace ou réservation livrée personnalisée : dès 99 €/mois sans commission, ou bientôt une tarification à la commission sans abonnement fixe.

EN (154 chars)

Marketplace or booking platform delivered customised: from €99/month with no commission, or soon commission-based pricing with no fixed subscription.

NL (152 chars)

Marktplaats- of boekingsplatform op maat geleverd: vanaf €99 per maand zonder commissie, of binnenkort een commissie-model zonder vast abonnement.

4. Model-comparison section for /cout-marketplace/

New H2 to insert after the existing commission section. This is the keyword-bearing block — it carries "tarification à la commission", "paiement par transaction", "sans abonnement fixe" and their EN/NL equivalents in natural prose.

H2 FR: Abonnement fixe ou pourcentage : les deux façons de payer H2 EN: Fixed subscription or percentage: the two ways to pay H2 NL: Vast abonnement of percentage: de twee manieren om te betalen

FR

Faut-il alors préférer une tarification à la commission ou un abonnement fixe ? Les deux modèles répondent à deux situations, pas à deux niveaux de qualité. Sans transactions encore, le paiement par transaction est mécaniquement plus sûr : un mois sans activité produit une facture proportionnellement faible, là où un abonnement fixe tombe quel que soit votre chiffre d'affaires. L'arbitrage s'inverse dès que le volume monte, parce qu'un pourcentage n'a pas de plafond alors qu'un abonnement, si : passé un certain volume mensuel, le forfait redevient le moins cher, et c'est le moment de basculer. Retenez surtout ceci quand vous comparez des offres : un pourcentage doit remplacer l'abonnement, pas s'y ajouter. Beaucoup de plateformes facturent les deux en même temps. Ici, les paliers d'abonnement ne prélèvent aucune commission, et la formule sans abonnement fixe, en préparation, fonctionnera à la place de l'abonnement — jamais en plus. Le taux sera annoncé au lancement, et les frais de mise en place restent dus dans les deux cas.

EN

So should you prefer commission-based pricing or a fixed subscription? The two models answer two situations, not two levels of quality. With no transactions yet, paying per transaction is mechanically safer: a month without activity produces a proportionally small invoice, whereas a fixed subscription lands whatever your revenue. The trade-off reverses as volume grows, because a percentage has no ceiling while a subscription does — past a certain monthly volume the flat fee becomes the cheaper option, and that is the moment to switch. Above all, remember this when comparing offers: a percentage should replace the subscription, not be added to it. Plenty of platforms charge both at once. Here, the subscription tiers take no commission, and the option with no fixed subscription, currently in preparation, will run instead of the subscription — never on top of it. The rate will be announced at launch, and the setup fee applies either way.

NL

Moet u dan een commissie-model of een vast abonnement verkiezen? De twee modellen antwoorden op twee situaties, niet op twee kwaliteitsniveaus. Hebt u nog geen transacties, dan is betalen per transactie mechanisch veiliger: een maand zonder activiteit levert een proportioneel lage factuur op, terwijl een vast abonnement valt ongeacht uw omzet. De afweging kantelt zodra het volume stijgt, want een percentage heeft geen plafond en een abonnement wel — voorbij een bepaald maandvolume wordt het vaste bedrag opnieuw het goedkoopste, en dat is het moment om over te stappen. Onthoud vooral dit bij het vergelijken van aanbiedingen: een percentage moet het abonnement vervangen, niet erbovenop komen. Veel platformen rekenen beide tegelijk aan. Hier nemen de abonnementsniveaus geen commissie, en de formule zonder vast abonnement, die in voorbereiding is, werkt in plaats van het abonnement — nooit erbovenop. Het tarief wordt bij de lancering bekendgemaakt, en de opstartkosten blijven in beide gevallen verschuldigd.

The "a percentage should replace the subscription, not be added to it" line is the most useful sentence on the page for a research-stage reader, and it happens to describe the client's own model. That is the ideal shape for cost-page copy: genuinely useful advice that the product satisfies, rather than a claim about the product.

5. FAQ entry — the two ways to pay

To be appended to the existing FAQ list. It must be added to FAQ_IDS so it renders, since the FAQPage markup is built from exactly the rendered list — a Q/A in the data but absent from FAQ_IDS would either be marked up while invisible (a penalty risk) or visible while unmarked.

FR

Quelles sont les deux façons de payer ? Aujourd'hui, un abonnement mensuel fixe : 99, 149 ou 249 € selon vos limites d'usage, sur devis au-delà, sans aucune commission sur vos transactions. Une seconde formule arrive bientôt, pensée pour les projets qui démarrent : un pourcentage de votre volume de transactions à la place de l'abonnement mensuel, dont le taux sera annoncé au lancement. Les deux modèles s'excluent — vous choisissez l'un ou l'autre, ils ne se cumulent jamais. Dans les deux cas, les frais de mise en place uniques restent dus, et vous pouvez passer d'un modèle à l'autre quand votre volume le justifie. Écrivez-nous si vous souhaitez être informé du lancement.

EN

What are the two ways to pay? Today, a fixed monthly subscription: €99, €149 or €249 depending on your usage limits, on quote beyond that, with no commission at all on your transactions. A second option is coming soon, designed for projects just starting out: a percentage of your transaction volume instead of the monthly subscription, with the rate announced at launch. The two models are mutually exclusive — you choose one or the other, they are never combined. In both cases the one-time setup fee still applies, and you can move between models when your volume justifies it. Write to us if you would like to be notified at launch.

NL

Wat zijn de twee manieren om te betalen? Vandaag een vast maandabonnement: €99, €149 of €249 afhankelijk van uw gebruikslimieten, daarboven op aanvraag, zonder enige commissie op uw transacties. Binnenkort komt er een tweede formule, bedoeld voor startende projecten: een percentage van uw transactievolume in plaats van het maandabonnement, waarvan het tarief bij de lancering wordt bekendgemaakt. De twee modellen sluiten elkaar uit — u kiest het een of het ander, ze worden nooit gecombineerd. In beide gevallen blijven de eenmalige opstartkosten verschuldigd, en u kunt van model wisselen wanneer uw volume dat rechtvaardigt. Schrijf ons als u op de hoogte wilt worden gebracht van de lancering.

6. Technical requirements for Alex

6.1 Exclude from the estimator totals

The estimator adds a setup total and a monthly total. This option has no monthly amount, so it cannot participate in the monthly sum — and adding it as 0 would display "€0/month" next to a Coming-soon label, which reads as free. Keep it out of the totals entirely; if it is selectable at all, the monthly box should show the same "rate announced at launch" wording the card uses.

6.2 Exclude from the JSON-LD offer list

This is the one that would cause real damage if missed. The AggregateOffer carries lowPrice: 99 and highPrice: 249.

• Do not add a fifth Offer. Do not set lowPrice: 0, do not invent a price, do not emit a percentage as a price.
• A percentage has no meaning as a schema.org price, and an unavailable option presented as a purchasable offer is exactly the mismatch that costs a rich result across the whole page — including the FAQ snippet that currently works.
• The visible card and section index normally as plain HTML. No markup needed for them to rank.

6.3 Tier limits must become visible on the cards

Carried forward from the previous brief and still outstanding: Starter 1 000 visitors / 50 vendors, Growth 10 000 / 250, Scale 50 000 / 1 000, Enterprise beyond that with unlimited vendors. Both new SEO pages now publish these numbers. If the tier cards stay vague while the articles are precise, the inconsistency shows up at the exact moment a prospect compares. Once on the cards, they flow into the structured data automatically since it reads the same source.

6.4 Badge and labels through i18n

The availability badge must be a real key in the three locale files, not a hardcoded string, or the EN and NL versions ship in French. The typed content interface will fail the build on a missing key, which is precisely the safeguard to use here.

7. Flags

7.1 Commission claim — corrected in both comparative pages

My earlier drafts contained unqualified statements ("Here there is no commission at all", "on a platform delivered without commission"). Those are now scoped to the subscription plans in all three languages on both pages, with the mutual exclusivity stated explicitly. An unqualified zero-commission claim cannot coexist with a percentage option displayed on the same site.

I deliberately kept the argument that a commission becomes expensive at volume, because it is true and it is also the client's own commercial interest: it is the reason to advise switching to a fixed tier as volume grows, which the copy now does.

7.2 Review date for "Coming soon"

A Coming-soon badge still present in six months costs more trust than the option gains, and the interest list built through the contact form ages with it. Worth agreeing a review date now rather than discovering it later.

7.3 Not written, because not confirmed

Two things a visitor will assume and that appear nowhere: a minimum monthly amount and a launch date. If a floor exists, it belongs on the card — a starter reading "your bill follows your actual activity" will assume a quiet month costs almost nothing, and a floor discovered afterwards contradicts the card's central promise. Tell me and I will add one line.

7.4 Business exposure, briefly

Hosting, database and maintenance cost the same regardless of which model a client picks, so a client with very low volume consumes a full instance for very little. That is a commercial question rather than an SEO one, and it is the usual reason vendors pair a commission with a floor — which is why §7.3 matters more than it looks. The copy as written implies no floor exists.