OpenAI recently announced they'll be taking a 4% cut on every sale completed through ChatGPT's Instant Checkout.
Starting 26 January, Shopify merchants can sell directly inside ChatGPT and OpenAI will take the cut, all made possible via the Agentic Commerce Protocol, which they have developed alongside Stripe.
The reaction I'm seeing across social and Linkedin...?
"Actually quite reasonable."
"Cheaper than Amazon's 10%+ fees."
"Better than Meta's ad costs."
And while they're not wrong, the question isn't whether 4% is expensive today. It's what it becomes once you're dependent on the channel.
Every Platform Starts Cheap
TikTok Shop launched in Southeast Asia with low commission rates. Merchants piled in. Volume grew. Dependency built.
Today? Over 16% in the same markets.
Amazon didn't start with 10%+ referral fees. YouTube didn't launch monetisation at current rates. Uber didn't begin with the current driver split.
The pattern is consistent: low entry pricing to build adoption, then steady extraction once switching costs make leaving painful.
OpenAI charging 4% from day one isn't greed. It's confidence. They believe ChatGPT will become essential commerce infrastructure. The 4% is just the opening bid, the hook.
The Dependency You're Not Calculating
Let's face it, if the sales are genuinely incremental (purchases that wouldn't have happened through your normal channels) then 4% is brilliant.
But if ChatGPT is just sending traffic that would have completed on your site anyway, you're loosing 4% margin.
And you have no way to measure which is which.
Attribution is broken in conversational interfaces. Someone asks ChatGPT for recommendations in January, thinks about it, purchases in February. Does the 4% apply? How do you prove incrementality?
You don't. You just pay and hope is my guess.
What You're Actually Trading
When the transaction takes place in Instant Checkout, you remain merchant of record. You handle fulfilment and customer service. That's good.
But you don't get the site visit.
The chance to retarget.
Do you get the customer data? The conversation context that led to the purchase? The questions they asked before buying?
We don't know yet. OpenAI says merchants "remain in control" but hasn't detailed what data you actually receive vs what the platform keeps.
If you get full customer intelligence, 4% might work. If you just get an order notification while OpenAI keeps the behavioural data, you're trading margin for blindness.
Most merchants won't know which until they've already committed.
Why Google Isn't Charging (Yet)
Google launched their Universal Commerce Protocol with direct checkout in AI Mode and Gemini. No transaction fees.
This isn't altruism. Google doesn't need transaction revenue. They monetise through search ads and Shopping. Making checkout frictionless strengthens the core business.
OpenAI has no comparable revenue engine. I assume subscriptions aren't enough. They need commerce revenue.
So OpenAI charges because they have to. Google doesn't because they can use "free" as a weapon.
You're watching two different business models compete. One is subsidised by adjacent revenue. The other needs this channel to be profitable standalone.
Guess which one has more pricing flexibility long-term?
So, What Happens Next?
Short term, merchants test it. Some measure incrementality obsessively (or try to). Most keep it enabled because fear of missing distribution outweighs the margin hit.
Medium term, the fee rises. Maybe slowly. Maybe by transaction tier. But it rises, because that's what happens when platforms control distribution.
Long term, we'll look back at 4% the way we look at early Amazon fees or 2015 Facebook ad costs. Quaint. A relic from before the real extraction began :p
The Uncomfortable Truth
Is 4% expensive? No. Relative to other channels, it's reasonable.
Is that the point? Also no.
The point is you're evaluating a static fee for a dynamic relationship. You're thinking about today's cost while building tomorrow's dependency.
Platforms that control discovery inevitably monetise that control. Amazon proved this. Google proved this. Facebook proved this.
OpenAI launching at 4% doesn't break the pattern. It just means they're confident enough to charge from day one rather than waiting for lock-in.
That confidence should tell you something.
Test it if your product fits. Measure everything. Track what customer data you actually receive.
But don't confuse "4% is cheaper than Google Ads" with "this is sustainable at sustainable economics."
The fee you're seeing isn't the fee you'll be paying in 18 months. And by then, opting out might cost more in lost distribution than staying in costs in margin.
The question isn't whether 4% is fair. It's whether you're comfortable with someone else controlling your distribution terms, with the pricing power to change them once you're dependent.
If you're fine with that trade - and for some businesses it's the right call - then 4% today is a bargain.
Just don't be surprised when the bargain reprices itself.