20 €
≈ 20%Hosting and technical infrastructure
Servers, database, CDN, monitoring. A modest but steady cost, run on OVH and Cloudflare.
Our model
We own the fact that we are a paid platform for hosts and a free service for travellers. It is a clean choice: we only have to answer to the person sitting across from us, not to an invisible advertiser.
The page below explains where the money comes from, where it does not, and why we hold this line even if it slows our growth.
Three revenue streams, listed by importance.
Hosts who want online booking and better visibility pay a subscription: Standard at €14.90 per month, Premium at €19.90 per month (cheaper when billed annually). It covers the bulk of our costs: servers, team, hosting, support.
Standard includes 2 love rooms, Premium has no limit. Beyond that, each extra love room costs €1.99 per month — one single price, built for small hotel groups and multi-listing managers.
Six paid placements exist: homepage, atmosphere page, region, department, featured city, nearby city. Each placement has a limited slot count and is billed quarterly. Wherever those cards read as a list of results — search results, and the listing cards under each atmosphere on the home page — they carry a “Partner” tag. One exception only: the home page’s “Featured” grid, presented as a curated block, where every card carries the same tag whether it was bought, picked by our team, or simply published recently.
A rough cost breakdown. The percentages are rounded and shift slightly from quarter to quarter.
Out of every
€100
of monthly revenue received, here is the split.
20 €
≈ 20%Servers, database, CDN, monitoring. A modest but steady cost, run on OVH and Cloudflare.
15 €
≈ 15%Stripe for subscription payments, Brevo for emails, a few editorial tools. Kept to the strict minimum.
60 €
≈ 60%Three founding partners involved in the project. It is the largest share, and it makes sense: an editorial selection lives on careful re-reading, not on volume.
5 €
≈ 5%What is left absorbs the unexpected and prepares the next steps (traveller reviews, country opening).
Four red lines we set on day one and that we will not cross.
The money you pay a host stays with the host. On a stay paid by bank card, not a cent flows back to us. If you pay with a Love in Room gift card, we retain 10% for the sale of the card — the rest goes to the host. It is our most visible form of independence.
When you click through to a host's site, the link is bare. No Booking parameter, no Airbnb code, no UTM tag slipped in to earn a commission. The rule is part of our internal commitments and is checked at every deployment.
Your details, your preferences, your browsing history are not sold to anyone. A few technical processors (email delivery, Stripe payments) handle data on a strict mandate, never for commercial purposes.
Listings are grouped by tier — Premium, then Standard, then Freemium — and that grouping depends on the host's subscription. Within a given tier, however, the sort you asked for (relevance, price, recently added) applies untouched: we never reorder listings of the same tier in exchange for a payment. A Freemium listing stays fully visible and browsable, with no visual downgrade — it simply appears after the others. Featured placements are bought separately and carry the “Partner” marker. If we ever changed this rule, we would say so beforehand, not after.
When you build a platform, the temptation to charge a commission on everything, the booking, the outbound click, the new visitor, is strong. The problem is that each new revenue flow creates an incentive to bend the ranking. In the long run, it shows. And once trust is gone, it does not come back.
We prefer a more modest, more readable model, where the host knows exactly what they pay and where the traveller knows the selection has not been weighted by a spreadsheet. It is a less marketable story than hyper-growth, but it is what allows us to look hosts in the eye.
This model means accepting a slower pace of growth: no commission stacking up as traffic rises, no artificial accelerator. We own that trade-off. We would rather have a site that lasts than the promise of an exponential curve.
Five questions we hear often when we explain the project.