Arch is a performance influencer agency built for games and apps, founded in Zagreb in 2019. It works from a network of 5,000-plus creators across the Americas, Europe, MENA and Australia and it optimises campaigns for installs, cost per install, return on ad spend and retention.
As a managed, performance-led agency, Arch does not sell a fixed-price plan. Pricing is quoted around your budget and goals, discussed upfront. Here is what that means in practice.
What Arch is
Arch is a hands-on agency, not a tool. A small, bootstrapped team that never raised funding runs campaigns across YouTube, Twitch, TikTok and Instagram, with a heavy focus on measurable performance for mobile games and apps. Its founders also built the UGC agency Indigo Meerkat.
Because the work is managed and performance-driven, the value is in the team picking creators that drive installs and revenue, not just reach. That focus shapes how it prices: around outcomes and budget rather than seats or searches.
The pricing
Arch does not publish pricing. It discusses your budget upfront and builds a campaign around it, so the cost depends on your goals, the scale of installs or revenue you are chasing and the creators involved. There is no public rate card to glance at.
That budget-first approach is common for performance agencies, since the spend is split between agency management and the creator and media costs that actually drive results. Expect to size it through a conversation rather than a page and to commit at campaign scale rather than a small monthly fee.
For a performance brand with real install or revenue targets, that model can make sense. For a team that just wants to find creators, paying an agency to run the whole thing is more than the job requires.
What drives the cost
The main drivers are your media budget and the performance goals attached to it. A campaign chasing large install volumes across several markets costs far more than a single-market test, because both the creator spend and the management scale with ambition.
Creator tier, platform mix and the level of optimisation also move the number. Performance work that tracks cost per install and retention closely takes more hands than a simple awareness post and that effort is priced in.
Who it fits
Arch fits mobile game and app brands that want performance influencer campaigns run for them, judged on installs, cost per install and retention, with the budget to commit at campaign scale. If user acquisition is your goal, its focus is rare and useful.
It is a weaker fit if you want transparent pricing, a tool you run yourself or campaigns outside games and apps. For those needs a self-serve discovery platform is leaner and cheaper.
Where Flinque fits
Arch quotes a managed performance campaign around your budget. Flinque does one part of that cheaply and directly: it lets your team find and vet creators yourself. You get 10M verified creators across Instagram, YouTube, TikTok and X, twelve filters and a fake-follower check on every profile, at prices printed on the page: free to start, $49 a month for Starter, $150 a month for Enterprise. No quote, no retainer, no annual lock-in.
The two suit different needs. For managed user-acquisition campaigns with hard install targets, Arch fits. For finding and vetting creators at a price you can read, Flinque is faster and far cheaper and many brands use it for discovery while keeping an agency only for performance execution.
How to budget for a performance campaign
Because Arch builds the campaign around your budget rather than a rate card, the number you walk in with shapes everything. That sounds flexible and it is but it also means the burden is on you to know what a sensible install or revenue target costs before you start negotiating.
Split the budget in your head into two buckets: the agency's management fee and the actual creator and media spend that drives installs. Performance agencies live on the second bucket being large, so a tiny media budget with a big management ask is a bad ratio. Ask Arch directly what share of your money reaches creators and media.
Pin down the metric you are paying against. Installs, cost per install, return on ad spend and retention are not interchangeable and a campaign optimised for raw installs can look great while retention quietly collapses. Agree the metric that matches your business before the campaign starts, not after the report lands.
Start with a single-market test rather than a multi-region launch. A bounded test tells you Arch's real cost per install for your app at a price you can afford to be wrong about and it gives you the data to scale or walk away. Committing a large multi-market budget on trust is how performance spend gets wasted.
And weigh the alternative honestly. If your real bottleneck is finding the right gaming and app creators rather than running paid media, a flat-price discovery tool does that part for a tiny fraction of an agency retainer and you keep control of the media spend yourself.
The takeaway
Arch prices its games and apps campaigns around your budget and performance goals rather than a public rate, which suits brands chasing installs and revenue at scale. The trade is opacity and a managed model.
If your real need is finding creators rather than handing off a performance campaign, a flat-price tool covers that for a fraction of the cost.
Want to find creators at a flat price? Try Flinque free and vet every audience before you pay.