Enatega pricing, without the sales call

What Enatega publishes

Enatega says it sells a one-time payment, not a subscription: full source code, no monthly fee and no delivery fee on orders. Its FAQ describes two plans. Lite gives you the full source code and you deploy it. Premium adds Enatega's team for deployment and app-store submission. The exact quote depends on your business model and is confirmed on a call.

That is a legitimate way to sell complex software. It is also a budgeting problem: two buyers can compare the same page and receive different numbers. Ask for the quote in writing, with the scope and exclusions attached.

Lite vs Premium

The table reflects Enatega's public description, not a contract. Confirm what “deployment” covers: server provisioning, backend configuration, payment keys, app builds, store submission, DNS and SSL, or only part of that list.

What the quote should include

• The customer, store, rider and admin applications, plus the website.
• The backend/API source and database schema, if “full source” is claimed.
• Deployment, or a documented self-deploy path for Lite.
• App-store submission and the accounts you need to own.
• The support period, response time and update policy.
• The licence text: domains, client work, resale, white-label and redistribution.
• Which verticals are enabled and which need extra configuration.

What it may not include

Budget these separately unless the quote says otherwise:

• VPS or cloud hosting, backups and monitoring.
• Payment-gateway fees and merchant-account setup.
• SMS/OTP, email, maps and push usage.
• Google Play ($25 once) and Apple Developer ($99/year) accounts.
• Branding, menu photography and content migration.
• Custom features, local gateways or unusual dispatch rules.
• Local taxes and any reseller or agency margin.

How to compare an Enatega quote with Foodomaa

Put both offers in the same spreadsheet. Do not compare a quote that includes deployment with a licence that does not, or vice versa. The useful columns are: licence/package, deployment, app-store submission, support, updates, payment integration, branding, migration and 20 developer hours.

An illustrative total-cost model

This is not an Enatega quote. It is a planning frame you can replace with real numbers:

Replace the first row with the actual quote. The point is that the licence is never the whole launch budget, in either model. A lower quote with a longer deployment or a stack your team does not know can cost more over year one.

Questions to ask Enatega sales

1. What is the exact Lite price and the exact Premium price?
2. Which repositories, backend code and licence text do we receive?
3. What does deployment include, and what is left to us?
4. Which app stores are covered, and who owns the developer accounts?
5. What is the support period, response time and update policy?
6. Which payment gateways are included, and which are custom?
7. Can you quote the same scope we would give Foodomaa, line by line?

What “full source code” should mean in the contract

“Full source” is a phrase, not a scope. Before you pay, ask for the repository list and the licence text. At minimum, the package should identify the customer app, store app, rider app, admin dashboard, website, backend/API, database schema and infrastructure configuration. If any of those are excluded, the quote is for a smaller product than the homepage implies.

Also ask whether the backend is included as source or only as a deployed service. A public frontend repository can create the impression that the whole stack is open, while the order, payment and dispatch logic sits in a private backend. That may be a perfectly good commercial model, but it changes what your developer can change without the outlet.

Finally, check the licence terms for client work, multiple domains, resale and white-label use. “No licence restriction” on a marketing page is not the same as a signed licence that lets you deliver the platform to a client or run it for multiple brands.

A request-for-quote template

Send the same scope to Enatega and to any fixed-price alternative. This makes the quotes comparable:

• Customer app, store app, rider app, admin dashboard and website.
• Backend/API source, database schema and deployment configuration.
• Installation and configuration on our server, including SSL, cron and queue.
• Payment gateway integration for [gateway] in [country], including webhook and refund tests.
• Branding: logo, colours, app name, icons, splash and legal pages.
• App-store submission: Google Play and Apple App Store, under our accounts.
• One custom report and one small workflow change, described precisely.
• Support period, response time, update policy and handover documentation.
• Training: one session for admin, outlet and rider operations.
• Explicit exclusions and the licence text attached to the quote.

A quote that cannot answer these lines is not comparable. It is a starting point for a scope conversation, not a price you can budget against.

Common pricing mistakes

• Comparing the licence to a deployment quote. Add the same deployment, branding and store work to both sides.
• Assuming support is included forever. Ask for the period, the response time and the price after it ends.
• Ignoring the stack. A cheaper licence in a stack your team does not know can cost more in month one than a higher licence in a stack they do.
• Forgetting the app stores. Developer accounts, signing, screenshots and review time are real costs, even when the outlet submits for you.
• Treating a public repo as the product. The commercial package and the GitHub repository are not always the same scope.
• Budgeting zero for migration. Moving outlets, menus, customers and orders from an existing platform is a project, not an import button.

Why a published price matters

A published price is not automatically better. A quote can include work that a fixed licence does not. But a published price lets a buyer budget, compare and decide without a sales call. Foodomaa publishes $299 because the scope is fixed: the apps, website, admin, source, installation and 30-day bug-fix window. If your scope is standard, that transparency is worth something.

If your scope is not standard, a quote is the honest model. Just make sure the quote is line-itemed, the licence is attached, and the exclusions are written down. A one-time payment with an unclear scope is not cheaper; it is a deposit on a project you have not scoped yet.