Three years of teaching, forty regular families, and a platform still owns the relationship. How the commission economics of GoStudent and Superprof work against tutors — and what custom infrastructure actually changes.
Three Years of Work, None of It Yours
Anna has a first-state examination in mathematics and physics from a German university. For three years, she's been teaching private lessons through an online tutoring platform — fifteen sessions a week, forty regular students, a rhythm built through referrals and consistent results. Parents recommend her. Students keep coming back.
None of those forty families belong to her in any meaningful sense. Their contact details sit in a platform database. Their booking history belongs to the platform. Their loyalty, such as it is, points at the app they opened to find her — not at her directly. If the platform adjusts its algorithm, revises its commission structure, or simply decides her profile needs a different placement, Anna rebuilds from scratch. Three years of reputation work, replaced by the next recommended profile in the feed.
That's the structural condition of platform-dependent tutoring. And in a market worth around €1.5 billion annually — a figure documented in Bertelsmann Stiftung research on German education spending — the economics increasingly favour the platform, not the tutor who does the actual teaching.
Klingt interessant?
The Commission Mathematics
GoStudent, one of the largest tutoring marketplaces in the German-speaking world, charges parents between €20 and €35 per 50-minute session depending on which subscription tier they've chosen. In 2025, the platform pays tutors between €12 and €15 for the same session — a rate that has been cut repeatedly since 2022, with each reduction explained internally as necessary for the company's "long-term financial health." GoStudent has around 23,000 tutors on its books and reported significant losses in 2022 and 2023 before claiming profitability in 2024.
The arithmetic is straightforward. A tutor giving fifteen sessions a week earns between €180 and €225 in net pay. The parents in those same sessions have collectively spent between €300 and €525. The spread — €120 to €300 per week, somewhere between €6,000 and €15,000 over a year — funds the platform's infrastructure, marketing, and customer acquisition. None of it builds the tutor's own practice.
Superprof operates on a different model, charging tutors monthly subscription fees for profile visibility rather than taking a per-session cut. The structural effect on tutors is similar: paying to be seen on a platform they don't control, in a marketplace that places their service next to dozens of near-identical alternatives. Price is the dominant comparison signal; track record is secondary.
The most significant cost, though, isn't measured in euros per hour. It's the ownership gap. Parents who book through GoStudent or Superprof have a relationship with that platform — payment details stored, accounts established, habits formed. The tutor is valued but replaceable. The platform is the constant. One algorithm tweak and the tutor's three years of trust-building become invisible.
What Dedicated Infrastructure Actually Does
The alternative isn't a contact form, a Calendly link, and a WhatsApp thread. That replicates the problem at lower cost without solving it.
What a tutoring professional needs is dedicated infrastructure: a booking system parents can use without friction, a portal where they can track their child's progress and access learning materials between sessions, automated invoicing that handles per-session billing and monthly packages, and lesson notes that accumulate into a record the tutor owns entirely.
The parent portal is the key element. A parent who checks weekly progress notes, reviews assigned homework, and books the next session through a system that runs under the tutor's own name is building a habit anchored to that tutor — not to a marketplace. That relationship doesn't require an algorithm to maintain. It becomes self-sustaining.
For tutors who have spent years building reputation on someone else's infrastructure, the move sounds daunting. In practice, families who have been satisfied for two or three years follow without friction when offered something more capable: real progress visibility, seamless rebooking, subject-organised learning materials. Nobody switches back to the platform once the custom system delivers more.
The economics make the case cleanly. At fifteen sessions per week, eliminating a platform's commission margin and recovering €10–15 per session covers meaningful development costs within months. What remains is a system the tutor owns outright — the booking logic, the parent relationships, the lesson history — none of which disappears when a platform decides to restructure its fee model or deprioritise certain tutor profiles.
nopex builds this kind of infrastructure for tutors and small tutoring institutes: booking systems with parent portals and lesson tracking, built specifically for tutoring rather than adapted from generic scheduling software designed for fitness studios or consultancies. The fields, reports, and workflows match how tutoring actually operates — session notes tied to subjects and students, progress visible to parents without requiring the tutor's manual input, billing logic that handles variable formats like single sessions, term packages, and regular weekly slots.
For Anna, and the forty families who have trusted her with their children's education for three years, that infrastructure is the difference between a job she does on a platform and a practice she owns.
