Olo, a company that usually works in the background of restaurant online ordering, launched a consumer app on October 20. The Olo food delivery app lets diners order pickup and delivery from many restaurants in one place. Restaurants pay no marketplace commission, and Olo is pitching the app around menu prices that match what guests pay in the store. That is a different model from DoorDash and Uber Eats. It is not automatically better than your own ordering website, and it is not automatically a source of new customers.
To judge it fairly, keep three things separate: the menu price a guest sees, the fees a guest pays at checkout, and the costs your restaurant pays to accept the order. Most confusion about this launch comes from blending them.
What is the Olo App, and who can use it?
The Olo App is a free mobile app, available on iOS and Android, according to WIRED’s launch coverage. Diners browse nearby restaurants, follow favorite brands so they appear first, and order for pickup or delivery. Nation’s Restaurant News reported that more than 250 restaurant brands that already use Olo were on the app at launch, including Five Guys, Waffle House, and First Watch. Olo’s CEO told Restaurant Dive that those brands represent roughly 20,000 locations.
Keep this app separate from the rest of Olo’s business. Operators mostly know Olo for behind-the-scenes ordering technology, such as the online menu and checkout on a brand’s own website. Business Insider’s report drew the same distinction between the new app and that existing restaurant-ordering business. A restaurant’s website can run on Olo technology and still be a different ordering channel from the Olo App.
Olo first unveiled the app in March, when Food On Demand described it as a “second-party” option positioned between third-party marketplaces and a restaurant’s own channels. October 20 is when it opened to the public.
Participation is still limited. Launch coverage describes brands that already use Olo, with plans to add more Olo customers first and restaurants outside Olo’s network later. That is a stated plan, not an open sign-up. Nationwide availability for diners also does not mean every neighborhood has participating restaurants. For many independents, it is something to watch rather than join today.
How is the Olo App different from DoorDash and Uber Eats?
The biggest difference is who pays what, and where the charge shows up.
In a traditional marketplace, the restaurant typically pays a commission on each order. NRN put those commissions on delivery orders at 15% to 30%. Many restaurants respond by pricing items higher on marketplaces than in the store, which passes part of that cost to the guest through the food price. Not every restaurant marks up, and not every marketplace requires it, but the incentive is easy to see.
The Olo App moves the visible charge. Restaurants pay no marketplace commission on app orders, so they have less reason to raise menu prices there. Instead, the guest pays a 5% network fee to Olo, plus delivery charges on delivery orders. Olo’s CEO told Restaurant Dive the fee is displayed on the menu and at checkout rather than bundled with other fees. WIRED also described a simpler interface without sponsored listings.
These are not the same kind of expense. A commission comes out of the restaurant’s side of the order. A network fee is added to the guest’s side. Comparing “30%” with “5%” as one line item mixes up two different wallets.
Delivery may also look familiar. Delivery orders go through Olo’s Dispatch system, which, according to Restaurant Dive, requests quotes from delivery services that serve the restaurant. Olo’s CEO said the drivers are often affiliated with DoorDash, Uber Eats, or other networks. A different ordering app does not necessarily mean a different courier.
Established marketplaces also keep real advantages: large customer bases, ordering habits built over years, and promotions guests already use. A different fee model does not, on its own, create new demand. Even Olo’s CEO told Restaurant Dive the app is unlikely to change industry economics right away.
How does the Olo App compare with your restaurant’s own ordering website?
These channels can overlap, but they do different jobs. Evaluate each one by the job it performs for your restaurant, not by whether it carries a commission-free label.
| Decision factor | Olo App | Restaurant’s own ordering website |
| Where the order starts | In a shared app where guests browse, follow, and compare restaurants | On your site or ordering link, usually after the guest has already chosen you |
| Restaurant charges and guest fees | No marketplace commission reported; guest pays a 5% network fee plus delivery charges | Set by your provider and setup; software, payment, and delivery costs apply, and some sites add guest fees |
| Branding and ordering experience | You manage your profile, menu, and photos within Olo’s app design | Your brand, layout, and ordering flow, within your provider’s options |
| Customer information and permission | Restaurant receives order data; guests control its use for marketing | Restaurant typically collects order data; marketing still requires guest consent |
| Delivery fulfillment | Routed through Olo’s Dispatch to available delivery services | Pickup, your own drivers, or a third-party delivery service, depending on setup |
| Availability and setup | Limited to participating Olo restaurant customers for now; wider access is planned | Offered by many software providers; you set it up, maintain it, and promote it |
Discovery versus an existing customer relationship
Consider two illustrative guests. The first is undecided and scrolling through options. The second orders the same dinner from you every other Thursday. These are examples, not measured customer segments, but they show where an intermediary earns its place.
For the first guest, a shared app can put your restaurant in front of someone who might not have found you. That is Olo’s pitch: its CEO told Restaurant Dive the app targets diners who are not loyal enough to download a single brand’s app but want multi-restaurant convenience without high delivery prices. For the regular, discovery adds little. If they move from your website to a shared app, you have the same customer and the same order through a different channel.
Price transparency versus the final bill
Matching in-store menu prices makes the food subtotal easier to compare, but guests pay the total. Restaurant direct ordering can carry customer fees too, depending on the provider and how the restaurant sets up service and delivery charges.
Illustrative fee comparison (not live checkout quotes): Assume identical $40 food subtotals, a 5% app fee calculated on that subtotal, and no equivalent guest service fee on the restaurant’s website. The fee adds $2 through the app. Before taxes, tips, delivery, and any other charges, the illustrated amounts are $42 versus $40.
That calculation assumes the fee is based on the food subtotal and excludes every other charge. It is not proof that direct ordering is always cheaper. It also does not mean the website order earns your restaurant $2 more. What the guest pays and what you keep are separate questions. Software, payment processing, fulfillment, and operating costs sit on your side of the ledger, and they differ by channel.
Data access versus control of the customer experience
NRN reported that restaurants can access customer data from Olo App orders, with guests controlling how that data is used for communication and marketing. NRN framed this as a difference from third-party apps, but access to information is not the same as control of the experience.
On your own website, you decide what guests see first, how the menu is organized, which add-ons appear, and where you send them next time. In the Olo App, you manage your profile, menu, and photos, but they sit inside an interface Olo designs, alongside other restaurants. In both channels, permission to market depends on what the guest agreed to. Neither gives you an unlimited mailing list.
Convenience versus responsibility
A shared app gives guests one login and one place to compare restaurants. A branded website gives them a focused experience built around your restaurant, but only if they can find it. That puts the work on you: the ordering link must be easy to reach from search, social profiles, receipts, and packaging, and fast on a phone. Neither is universally better, and your own order data will say more about your guests’ preferences than any launch announcement.
The useful question for any order is what kind it is. It might be a new business, an existing customer choosing another channel, or a convenience that keeps a customer ordering from you. Each has a different value and needs to be counted differently.
What should independent restaurants do with this information?
Start by checking whether you are eligible and on what terms. Ask for the full commercial picture: software fees, payment processing, delivery costs, and who pays them, and any contract requirements. “No marketplace commission” describes one cost, not all of them.
Next, compare the same order across channels. Build an identical basket, choose the same fulfillment method, and review the complete checkout on every channel you can access. Then list separately what your restaurant actually pays on each one.
If you are eligible, run a limited pilot instead of switching systems. A 30-day trial is our editorial suggestion, not an Olo requirement. Track:
- Order volume through the app
- Whether orders appear to come from new or existing customers
- Changes in direct website orders over the same period
- Repeat orders from app guests
- Applicable costs per order
- Staff workload, including extra devices, handoffs, or delivery issues
Watch the second item closely. A new app account is not necessarily a new restaurant customer. Someone who has ordered from your website for two years can sign up for the Olo App and look new. Where your systems and guest permissions allow, match phone numbers or emails across channels.
A before-and-after comparison cannot prove the app caused a change, because seasonality, promotions, weather, and local events all move demand. Use the pilot to measure profitability by ordering channel, which means accounting for food, labor, and packaging, not just sales.
One distinction matters more than the totals. An order that fills unused kitchen capacity on a slow weekday afternoon has a different value from an order that replaces a purchase a regular would otherwise have placed directly. The first adds sales. The second may only move them.
While you evaluate, keep improving the channel you already run: a current menu, a short checkout, and an easy-to-find ordering link. You do not need to abandon marketplaces or push every guest toward one channel. The goal is to serve guests well wherever they order, at a cost that works for you.
Where a connected direct-ordering setup fits
Whatever you decide about the Olo App, your direct channel still needs to work well and be easy to manage alongside your other channels. That is the job Orders.co is built for.
Orders.co provides a branded restaurant direct-ordering website, brings direct orders and integrated third-party marketplace orders into one place, lets you manage menus across channels from a master menu, and reports sales by channel. Those reports show where orders come from. They do not show profit on their own. Food, labor, packaging, and other costs still need to be factored in.
One published example: over an approximately 12-month reporting period, Spartan’s Grill recorded $38,663.75 in direct website sales across 1,138 orders while continuing to use delivery marketplaces. The full breakdown is in Spartan’s Grill’s direct-ordering results. It is one restaurant’s experience, not a typical outcome, and sales figures are not proof of higher profit.
If this launch has you reviewing your channels, it is a good moment to check how your own ordering website performs and how easily regulars can find it. The Orders.co team can walk through your current setup with you.
The bottom line for restaurant owners
The Olo food delivery app offers a genuinely different structure: the guest pays a visible fee, the restaurant pays no marketplace commission, and the restaurant gets access to order data. That deserves serious attention. It has not changed restaurant economics yet, and its value for any single restaurant depends on whether it reaches guests you would not otherwise serve.
The decision principle is the same for every channel, including your own website. Choose channels by the customers they reach, the costs they create, the experience they give guests, and the business they genuinely add.
