Stargazer is a direct-response influencer agency from San Francisco, founded in 2016, focused on apps and ecommerce. It works from a network of more than 2M creators across YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, with proprietary creator-matching technology and it claims more than $100M in driven sales and 10M-plus app installs.
As a performance, CPA-focused agency, Stargazer prices around results rather than a public rate. Here is what that means in practice.
What Stargazer is
Stargazer is a managed agency built for direct response. Rather than chasing awareness, it optimises for cost per acquisition, driving installs and sales for app and ecommerce brands, using proprietary tech to match creators to performance goals.
Because the model is performance-led, you are buying measurable outcomes and managed execution, which shapes its pricing around results and budget rather than seats or searches.
The pricing
Stargazer does not publish pricing. As a CPA-focused agency it quotes around your performance goals and budget, so cost depends on the installs or sales you are chasing, the creators involved and the markets. There is no public rate card.
Since the spend covers creator and media costs plus managed optimisation, it lands as a campaign-scale commitment rather than a small monthly fee. Sizing it means a conversation about your acquisition targets.
For an app or ecommerce brand with clear acquisition goals, that performance pricing can make sense. For a team that just needs 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 acquisition goals and media budget. Chasing more installs or sales across more markets means more creator and media spend and the managed optimisation scales with it.
Creator tier, platform mix and the depth of tracking also factor in. Direct-response work measured on cost per acquisition takes close management, which is priced into the fee.
Who it fits
Stargazer fits app and ecommerce brands that want direct-response influencer campaigns judged on cost per acquisition, with the budget to commit at campaign scale. If installs and sales are the goal, its focus is rare and useful.
It is a weaker fit if you want transparent pricing, a tool you run yourself or awareness-led campaigns. For those a self-serve discovery platform is leaner and cheaper.
Where Flinque fits
Stargazer quotes a managed, CPA-focused campaign. Flinque does the discovery half cheaply and directly. 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.
They suit different needs. For direct-response acquisition campaigns run for you, Stargazer fits. For finding and vetting creators yourself at a price you can read, Flinque is faster and far cheaper and pairs well with running your own performance media.
How to budget for a CPA campaign
Stargazer prices around acquisition, so the figure that matters is your target cost per install or sale and what you can afford to pay for each new user. Walk in with that number, because a CPA-focused agency builds the campaign around it and a vague target produces a vague and usually larger, budget.
Split the spend into media and management. Direct-response campaigns live on the media and creator costs that actually drive installs, so confirm what share of your budget reaches those versus the agency fee. A heavy management cut on a thin media budget is a poor ratio for performance work.
Agree the attribution up front. Cost per acquisition only means something if you both measure it the same way, so settle how installs and sales are tracked and credited before the campaign starts. Disputes over attribution after the fact are how performance relationships sour.
Run a contained test first. A single-platform, single-market test reveals Stargazer's real cost per acquisition for your app or store at a budget you can afford to be wrong about and it gives you the evidence to scale or stop. Large up-front commitments on an unproven CPA are the risk to avoid.
And weigh the cheaper half. If finding the right direct-response creators is your actual bottleneck, a flat-price tool does the finding and vetting for a fixed fee and you keep the performance media in-house rather than paying an agency to wrap it.
The bottom line is to lead with your numbers. Stargazer prices around acquisition, so the campaign is only as sound as the target cost per install or sale you bring to it and the attribution you both agree before you start. Split media from management, run a contained single-market test before any large commitment and judge the agency on a proven cost per acquisition rather than a promised one. Done this way, performance pricing aligns the agency's incentives with yours. Done loosely, it invites a vague, oversized budget. And if finding the right direct-response creators is the real bottleneck, a flat-price tool does that for a fixed fee while you keep the media in-house.
The takeaway
Stargazer prices around acquisition outcomes, quoting CPA-focused app and ecommerce campaigns rather than a public rate. For brands chasing installs and sales, that performance focus is the appeal.
If your real need is finding creators rather than handing off a performance campaign, a flat-price tool covers it for far less.
Want to find creators at a flat price? Try Flinque free and vet every audience before you pay.