Case study · 2024

A food and grocery delivery platform delivered in 6 working days.

Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) needed a food and grocery delivery platform. The Glovo Clone base already carried the mechanics, so the engagement went where their product was actually different. We built the product; they launched the brand.

  • Glovo Clone · MXLovo
  • 6 working days our build time on the base
  • Source code transferred to Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s own account
TITalokitoko (Izi Technologies)Izi Technologies
TITalokitoko (Izi Technologies)
Solution
Glovo Clone
Product
MXLovo
Delivered
2024
Stack
PHP LARAVEL · MYSQL · FLUTTER · GOOGLE MAPS · FIREBASE
Build time
6 working days
Blocks reused
19 of 24
Source code
Transferred
4applications shipped
19blocks reused unchanged
5built for this client
9integrations, each isolated
100%source code transferred

What already existed, and what did not.

The distinction that decides a project like this: the mechanics were proven before the engagement started, so the time went into the part that was theirs.

We build the product; the client launches the brand. That is the arrangement, and it only works if the handover is real: Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) owns the source code, had a launch date in writing before work started, and can check every figure on this page against a public ledger.

Talokitoko is grocery and food delivery for the African diaspora market in Europe. The rider app, dispatch and the merchant console were already built, so we spent the engagement on our own local payment mix, the vendor onboarding flow and the regions we actually operate in. The platform was live inside a month, which was months faster than our internal estimate.

Charles Eveillard, Managing Partner · Izi Technologies

The line between reused and built.

The work sat where it always sits on this base: store network, delivery zones, fees & commission. Everything else on the list below arrived already built and proven on other engagements running the same base.

4Applications and consoles shipped, each with its own permissions and release pathDelivered
19Platform modules reused unchanged from the Glovo Clone baseDelivered
5Decisions built for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies): store network, delivery zones, fees & commissionDelivered
3Environments: development, staging and productionDelivered
100%Source code transferred to Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s own accountContractual

What Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) actually needed.

A food and grocery delivery platform is not one feature. It is 24 distinct pieces that all have to work together before a single customer can be served, and most of them already existed and had been proven elsewhere.

That distinction decides the shape of a project like this. A business does not need a dispatch engine or a settlement ledger to be invented again; it needs one that already works, then it needs the handful of decisions that make the product theirs rather than anyone else’s. The four below are the load-bearing pieces Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) would otherwise have spent months building before proving anything to a customer.

Every platform of this kind has the same shape underneath: a set of load-bearing parts that must be correct before a single customer can be served, and a much smaller set of decisions that make it one business rather than another.

Building the first set from zero would have consumed the window before the second was even discussed. That is the decision this engagement turned on, and it was taken before any code was written.

Customer appbrowse, order, track
Store consolecatalogue, accept, prep
Driver appcollect, deliver, earn
Adminonboarding, disputes,

What we settled before building.

Which of the 24 pieces were already solved, and which were genuinely Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s to decide. Getting that line in the right place before any code is written is what keeps a Glovo Clone engagement short, and it is the conversation we would rather have honestly than optimistically.

Where a scope genuinely does not fit a proven base, we say so during scoping and quote it as a custom build instead, even when that costs us the larger and more comfortable project.

01

Read the requirement back to first principles

What must exist at launch, separated from what a business can add once it has customers. Those are different lists and conflating them is what makes projects run long.

02

Base versus build, capability by capability

Each of the 24 capabilities assessed against the existing base as covered, partial or absent. Partial is treated as absent, because a half-fitting module costs more than a new one.

03

Mark what only Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) could decide

5 decisions were commercial or jurisdictional rather than technical. Those were theirs, and the engagement is where they got implemented.

04

Agree the line before writing anything

19 pieces reused unchanged, 5 built. Fixing that line up front is what turns a platform of this size into a six-working-day build.

The parts that are genuinely hard.

Not marketing difficulty, actual difficulty. These are the problems any serious Glovo Clone has to solve properly, and the reason building one from a blank page is a multi-quarter commitment rather than a sprint.

Each was solved once, on the base, and has been under load on other builds since. Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) inherited the solutions rather than the problems.

01

Anything-delivery

A catalogue spanning food, groceries and parcels means different baskets, substitutions and handling rules on one platform.

Already solved in the base: Customer app
02

Live routing

Assignment, batching and re-routing have to hold up while the courier is already moving.

Already solved in the base: Store console
03

Store onboarding at scale

Every new merchant is a catalogue, an acceptance flow and a settlement account.

Already solved in the base: Driver app

What we did not have to build for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies).

Every platform is made of the same mechanics underneath. This is the account of which of them Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) paid attention to, and which were already solved.

Built from nothing, Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) would have meant paying for the mechanics again: the accounts, the sessions, the payments, the admin, the permissions. That work is real, it is slow, and none of it is what makes this product different from the next one. Starting from the Glovo Clone base moved that cost out of the project entirely, and the platform itself was deployed in 6 working days.

What that bought is attention. The engagement went into the 5 parts that were actually different, instead of being spread thin across 24 of them.

Shipped ready-made19 of 24
01
Customer appbrowse, order, track
02
Store consolecatalogue, accept, prep
03
Driver appcollect, deliver, earn
04
Adminonboarding, disputes,
05
API gatewayauth, rate limits,
06
Realtime channelorder status, driver
07
Event busasync fan-out, retries
08
Order lifecycleone record, three
09
Store cataloguelistings, stock, options
10
Basket & checkoutoptions, fees, tips
11
Store queueaccept, prep timing
12
Driver dispatchproximity, batching
13
Live trackingroute, ETA, handover
14
Wallet & payoutsstore, driver,
15
Identity & KYCaccounts, documents
16
Ratings & commsin-order chat, reviews
17
storeorders, ledger,
18
realtimedriver locations
19
Object storagecatalogue media
Made for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)5 of 24
01
Store networkwho you sign
02
Delivery zoneswhere you operate
03
Fees & commissionyour economics
04
Payment gatewaysyour providers
05
Brand & themingthree apps
Build all 24 from nothing, mechanics included 19 already solved, so the effort went to the 5 that were not

What this market demanded.

DRC, delivery

Delivery in the DRC is a mobile-money market with limited card penetration and addressing that does not follow street numbering, so pickup and drop-off rely on landmarks and live location rather than a postal database. Pricing has to survive currency movement.

None of that is optional, and none of it is something a platform can guess on a client’s behalf. It is precisely why the 5 decisions listed further down sat with Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) rather than with us: they are commercial and jurisdictional questions, and the base exists so that answering them is the whole job rather than the last ten per cent of it.

Everything that shipped with it.

The full working set Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) took delivery of. Each piece was already built and proven on other engagements before this one started, which is the only honest reason a platform of this size stands up in six working days rather than months.

None of it is a demo or a scaffold. These are the same components running under other businesses in other markets, which means the failure modes are already known and already handled rather than waiting to be discovered by Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s first real customers.

Reused from the Glovo Clone base

Customer appbrowse, order, track
Store consolecatalogue, accept, prep
Driver appcollect, deliver, earn
Adminonboarding, disputes,
API gatewayauth, rate limits,
Realtime channelorder status, driver
Event busasync fan-out, retries
Order lifecycleone record, three
Store cataloguelistings, stock, options
Basket & checkoutoptions, fees, tips
Store queueaccept, prep timing
Driver dispatchproximity, batching
Live trackingroute, ETA, handover
Wallet & payoutsstore, driver,
Identity & KYCaccounts, documents
Ratings & commsin-order chat, reviews
storeorders, ledger,
realtimedriver locations
Object storagecatalogue media

Built for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)

Store networkwho you sign
Delivery zoneswhere you operate
Fees & commissionyour economics
Payment gatewaysyour providers
Brand & themingthree apps

The base this was built on.

The same architecture carries every Glovo Clone on this page. The filled blocks are the parts built for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies).

Glovo Clone architecture MXLovo / filled = built for this client
Glovo Clone: the architecture, and one delivery traced through it 4 client surfaces reach an edge of gateway, realtime channel and event bus. The base holds 9 services, of which Order lifecycle is the source of truth, and 5 blocks are built for each client. Partner services sit behind a boundary and are chosen by the client. Underneath, one delivery is traced across 5 steps. 19 of 24 blocks are reused unchanged. Glovo Clone MXLovo One documented build runs on this base. Only the filled blocks are built for you. Ships ready-made Built for this client Surfaces Edge The base - already built Partner boundary Data Customer app browse, order, track Store console catalogue, accept, prep Driver app collect, deliver, earn Admin onboarding, disputes, payouts API gateway auth, rate limits, idempotency Realtime channel order status, driver position Event bus async fan-out, retries Order lifecycle one record, three parties SOURCE OF TRUTH Store catalogue listings, stock, options Basket & checkout options, fees, tips Store queue accept, prep timing Driver dispatch proximity, batching Live tracking route, ETA, handover Wallet & payouts store, driver, commission Identity & KYC accounts, documents Ratings & comms in-order chat, reviews Built for this client Store network who you sign Delivery zones where you operate Fees & commission your economics Payment gateways your providers Brand & theming three apps chosen by the client Maps & routing their key Payment gateway their merchant account Push & SMS their sender Object storage their bucket Transactional store orders, ledger, identities Cache & realtime driver locations Object storage catalogue media one delivery, end to end every step below runs on blocks that already existed 1 Basket catalogue, options, fees 2 Accept store queue, prep time 3 Match nearest driver, batching 4 Deliver live route, handover 5 Settle store, driver, commission PHP LARAVEL · MYSQL · FLUTTER · GOOGLE MAPS · FIREBASE 19 of 24 blocks reused unchanged 5 built for you
This is the Glovo Clone base, drawn as it was actually assembled for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies). The plain blocks are the ready-made platform and shipped as they are. The filled blocks are the ones we built for this client. 19 of 24 blocks were reused, 5 were built.

Why none of this had to be written again.

Each of these was already running on other builds of the same base before Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) started. That is the whole reason the platform was standing in days rather than months.

Customer appbrowse, order, track
Store consolecatalogue, accept, prep
Driver appcollect, deliver, earn
Adminonboarding, disputes,
API gatewayauth, rate limits,
Realtime channelorder status, driver
Event busasync fan-out, retries
Order lifecycleone record, three
Store cataloguelistings, stock, options
Basket & checkoutoptions, fees, tips
Store queueaccept, prep timing
Driver dispatchproximity, batching
Live trackingroute, ETA, handover
Wallet & payoutsstore, driver,
Identity & KYCaccounts, documents
Ratings & commsin-order chat, reviews
storeorders, ledger,
realtimedriver locations
Object storagecatalogue media

The decisions that were actually theirs.

A ready-made base does not remove these; it removes everything underneath them. Each one below is a choice Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) had to make, and the engagement is where those choices got implemented.

Store network

Configured for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) during the engagement.

Why it sat with themCommercial rather than technical. The base already handles the mechanics underneath, so the engagement is where their own answer gets implemented.

Delivery zones

Where delivery runs, and the boundaries dispatch respects.

Why it sat with themCoverage is an operations question tied to the fleet and the cities they actually serve, so it is set by them and changed by them.

Fees & commission

The economics across diner, restaurant and courier.

Why it sat with themTake rate and pricing are the business model itself. We implement the numbers they set; we do not choose them.

Payment gateways

Which providers the client is onboarded with, and how funds settle back to them.

Why it sat with themWhich processor sits behind the wallet follows from their jurisdiction, banking relationship and settlement terms. None of that is a technical choice.

Brand & theming

The identity carried across every surface, so it reads as the client’s product rather than a template.

Why it sat with themThe base has to disappear behind their identity, so this is applied across every surface rather than skinned on one.

What the six days actually cover.

Our build time on a ready-made base, and nothing else. The parts that sit with the client are named plainly.

01

White-label

The base is rebranded to the client’s identity across every surface.

02

Deploy

Stood up on the client’s own hosting, not ours.

03

Publish

Apps submitted from the client’s own developer accounts.

04

Handover

Source, schema, deployment configuration and architecture notes transferred.

The client supplies the hosting and domain, a verified developer account we publish from, branding and business details, an onboarded payment gateway with KYC complete, and any third-party API keys. Store review and merchant onboarding are controlled by Apple, Google and the payment provider, so those sit outside our window. Every figure here is defined on the facts page.

Who uses it, and for what.

Rather than screenshots of a product that has moved on since delivery, this is the set of surfaces that shipped and what each one is for. Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) received every one of them, with the source behind each.

Every role here is a separate application with its own permissions, its own state and its own release path. Building them to work as one system is most of the engineering in a platform of this kind, and it is the part that was already finished before this engagement began.

Customer app
browse, order, track
Store console
catalogue, accept, prep
Driver app
collect, deliver, earn
Admin
onboarding, disputes,

What guards the platform.

Built into the base and hardened across every engagement running it, rather than bolted on at the end of this one. Security added late is security that has to be argued for; the controls below were load-bearing from the first deployment.

We claim the process, not a certificate. Miracuves does not hold ISO 27001, and we do not say otherwise: we build to the controls those frameworks require, and the evidence trail is there for an auditor who asks.

Identity & KYC

accounts, documents. Part of the base, so it was proven before this engagement started.

Role separation

Each surface sees only what its role permits, enforced server-side rather than hidden in the interface.

Audit trail

Who changed what and when, retained so a dispute can be answered with a record rather than a recollection.

Transport and storage

TLS end to end, credentials hashed, and anything sensitive at rest encrypted rather than merely obscured.

Secrets handling

Keys live in environment configuration on their own infrastructure, never in the repository we hand over.

Card data stays out

Payment details go to the gateway directly. The platform holds a reference, not a card number.

Backups and restore

Scheduled backups with a restore that was actually run, because an untested backup is a guess.

What it connects to.

The connection points are part of the base and were already written and tested. Which providers sit behind each one was Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s decision, because those choices are commercial and jurisdictional rather than technical.

This is also where the client-side dependencies live. Gateway onboarding, KYC approval and merchant review are controlled by the provider, not by us, which is why they sit outside the build window rather than inside it.

Every one of these was already wired and tested in the base. What changed for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) was which account sat on the far side of it.

Payments and payoutsgateway of their choosing
Identity and KYCprovider per jurisdiction
Maps and geocodingtiles, routing, distance
Messaging and voicein-product communication
Object storage and CDNtheir bucket, their region
Media pipelinetranscode and delivery
Search and indexingcatalogue, filters, ranking
Market data feedsrates and reference prices
Push and transactional emailsent under their sender identity

What it runs on.

The platform stack for MXLovo. This describes the base as it stands today; Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) took delivery of the source and has owned it since.

Platform
PHP LARAVELMYSQLFLUTTERGOOGLE MAPSFIREBASE
The stack the MXLovo base runs on, already in production elsewhere
Surfaces
Customer appStore consoleDriver appAdmin
Each a separate application with its own permissions and release path
Client decisions
Store networkDelivery zonesFees & commissionPayment gatewaysBrand & theming
Configured for Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) during the engagement
Handover
SourceSchemaDeployment configArchitecture notes
Transferred at the end of the build

Where the six days went.

Our build time only. Store review and merchant onboarding are controlled by Apple, Google and the payment provider, so they sit outside this window and we do not count them as ours. Stating that plainly is the difference between a build time and a promise we cannot keep. Every figure here is defined on the facts page.

The six working days are guaranteed. If a ready-made platform is not live in six, we keep working free until it is. A deadline nobody is accountable for is not a deadline, and a guarantee nobody pays for is not a guarantee.

Throughout, a named team worked the build and sent Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) progress on WhatsApp every working day. There was never a week where nobody knew where it stood, which is the part clients tell us they notice more than the date itself.

6 working days our side of the window

The bar below is that window, day by day. Nothing outside it is counted as ours, and nothing inside it waits on someone else.

Day 1
Base stood up and white-labelled
Base stood up and white-labelled
Days 2-4
5 client decisions implemented
5 client decisions implemented
Day 5
Deployed, apps submitted
Deployed, apps submitted
Day 6
Source, schema and config handed over
Source, schema and config handed over

This base has done this before.

Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) was not the experiment. The base underneath this build had already carried other businesses in other markets before it carried theirs, which is the whole argument for reuse: the risk was retired by somebody else’s project, not by this one.

Across everything delivered since 2010 that is more than 9,000 products for over 6,000 businesses across 35+ industries. The eighty-four documented on this site are the ones with a named client and permission to show the work; most of the rest sits under NDA or white-label and is deliberately not here at all.

Every number on this page is defined and sourced on a public facts ledger. That is the whole instinct behind how this company is run: most vendors ask you to trust them, and we would rather you checked us. If we cannot back a claim, we do not make it, which is why you will not find a satisfaction percentage or an unnamed award anywhere on this site.

19 of 24

Blocks reused unchanged on this build, each already under load on other engagements.

Architecture
1

Documented builds running on the Glovo Clone base, in different markets.

Portfolio
9,000+

Products delivered for more than 6,000 businesses across 35+ industries since 2010.

Company record
3,900+

Apps published under clients’ own brands, counted per store release.

Company record

What the client reported.

Figures supplied by the client and published with their name against them.

4-5 months faster than internal estimate reported by the client

The base carried the load-bearing parts, so the engagement went into what made this build theirs rather than anyone else’s.

Charles Eveillard, Managing Partner, Izi Technologies
6 working daysOur build window on this engagement.Miracuves delivery record
100%Source code transferred to Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s own account.Contractual
19 of 24Blocks reused unchanged from the base.Glovo Clone architecture

Talokitoko is grocery and food delivery for the African diaspora market in Europe. The rider app, dispatch and the merchant console were already built, so we spent the engagement on our own local payment mix, the vendor onboarding flow and the regions we actually operate in. The platform was live inside a month, which was months faster than our internal estimate.

Charles EveillardManaging Partner, Izi Technologies

What Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) holds now.

The same on every engagement. What happened to the platform after handover was theirs to decide.

GITApplication sourceFull repository history, transferred to their accountDelivered
APPMobile projectsSources with signing documentedDelivered
SQLSchema and migrationsReproducible from empty, not a dumpDelivered
ENVDeployment configurationAnother team can run it unaidedDelivered
MDArchitecture notesWhat was chosen, what was rejected, whyDelivered
60dSupport windowSixty days included, six and twelve month optionsDelivered

The questions that decide this.

Answered for this build. The same answers hold for every Glovo Clone in the portfolio.

Do we own the code?

Yes. The full repository history transferred to Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s own account at handover, with deployment configuration and architecture notes. It is not a licence and it is not held against a support contract.

How is six working days realistic?

Because 19 of the 24 pieces were built and proven before the engagement started. The six days are our build time on that base, not a calendar promise.

What sat with Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)?

Hosting and domain, a verified developer account we publish from, branding and business details, an onboarded payment gateway with KYC complete, and any third-party API keys.

Will it look like everyone else’s?

No. The base supplies mechanics, not identity. Branding, flows and every customer-facing screen were built for this product.

Is this what the platform looks like today?

This describes what was delivered in 2024. What happened afterwards was Talokitoko (Izi Technologies)’s to decide; the source transferred at handover. Clients move on, rebuild, or sell up, and none of that changes what was delivered or how it went.

Would you have said no to this project?

We are a good fit for a founder who wants a proven model launched fast, a deadline they can hold us to, and code they own outright. We are a poor fit for anyone who needs a team embedded in their office full-time, or who wants a blank page and a six-month roadmap. Being straight about that up front saves everyone a call.

Who actually worked on it?

A named team, not a rotating pool. Our leadership is public with real profiles rather than a stock-photo team page, and progress went to Talokitoko (Izi Technologies) on WhatsApp every working day of the build.

Building something like this?

Tell us what you are building and we will say plainly whether a ready-made base fits it, including when the answer costs us the larger project.