What must be clearly demonstrated for credibility is how the statement on the homepage is constructed:
USD 6,7+ million / 1000 micro / year profit
The foundation of the revenue is extreme scalability.
From a horizontal perspective, the system can target approximately 33 million micro-businesses in the EU, and ~400 million globally.
From a vertical perspective, we have identified 12 revenue-generating points per client.
because the bank is embedded in the client’s operation
Out of these:
At the same time, there is no exact data for additional effects such as:
These represent further upside, but are not included in the core calculation.
At 1000 micro-business clients, assuming:
the core banking revenue is approximately:
→ USD ~ 2960 / client / year
This results in:
→ USD ~296,000 / year core banking revenue (1000 clients)
If the client receives the system free from the bank, price sensitivity decreases, therefore higher banking fees are accepted.
Fee-based banking revenues represent approximately 64% of total banking revenue, while the remaining 36% is driven by BUBOR-related income. The 30% pricing uplift applies only to this 64% fee-based portion, as BUBOR-related income is yield-driven and not subject to pricing adjustments.
A 30% increase in banking fees results in:
→ USD ~568,000 additional annual revenue (per 1000 clients)
Since the bank provides the sales channels (webshop, ordering applications, digital interfaces), it can charge commission on transactions generated through them.
Monetization happens through usage.
This is the same model used by platforms such as:
Fizz, eMAG, Amazon, eBay, Foodora, Wolt.
These typically operate with 5–15% commission levels.
We estimate marketplace revenues based on the assumption that:
For a micro client with USD 320,000 annual revenue:
In a more conservative scenario:
→ USD 320,000 / client / year
At 1000 clients, this results in:
→ USD 3,200 million annual marketplace revenue
→ Total: ~ USD 6,7 billion / year / 1000 micro clients
This means that the statement on the homepage is achievable using only two revenue sources.
To evaluate profitability, cost must also be considered.
With Ordware, costs approach zero.
The cost structure is designed so that:
At the same time, due to the technology, these costs remain minimal.
The model is:
B2B2B White-Label Core License + Royalty
With the license, the bank receives a system that is already:
Therefore:
The royalty applies to revenue streams that were previously inaccessible to the bank, such as marketplace commissions.
For example, when a customer purchases a product (e.g. food through the application), the bank earns a 3–10% commission, from which Ordware receives a share.
Due to the All-in-One-All-in architecture:
Measured data shows:
System usage:
→ operating cost approaches zero
As a result:
→ Revenue ≈ Profit
Sustainability is built into the model.
The client receives massive value, but cannot take the system with them.
Therefore:
→ long-term retention is ensured
Revenue is recurring.
Growth is compounding.