PostHog’s Smart Pricing Strategy That Sets It Apart (Part 1)

Hey everybody, welcome back to another special edition of Monetizing SaaS. Today we're kicking off a two-part teardown of PostHog, which is a really well-known developer tool. They're well-known, at least initially, for kind of open sourcing an analytics product. Over the last 5, 6 years, they've launched a number of different products from session replay to feature flags. So in this first episode, we're going to dive into their pricing page. We're going to break down what we love about it, what we think works really well, where there might be room for opportunity or improvement. And then in part 2, which we'll, we'll come back to next week, we're going to take a really close look at their purchasing experience from onboarding all the way through activation and expansion. As always, I'm joined by Schematic co-founders Ben, Jazz, and Geo. Excited to hear everybody's thoughts. So let's dive in here. All right. I want to kick this off by like just this alone, right? Like this is sort of incredibly original and unique. But like before we kind of just start talking about like the irreverence and PostHog's branding and everything they do, I want to start with Ben and Ben, you know, as a developer, I'm curious kind of the, like how you perceive PostHog, like before even coming into this episode and this pricing page in terms of like what they do.

Yeah, it seems like they've kind of created a brand for themselves as being like a Swiss Army knife. Developer tool like go to PostHog for feature management, session replay analytics. And there's, I think, a long tail of other products they have. I hear them brought up a lot by startup people and early-stage or hobbyist developers. I think they have established, yeah, a strong brand among folks that are especially price sensitive or still just kind of testing the market for their product.

Gio, amongst the pricing pages that we've looked at on Monetizing SaaS, this is immediately and obviously the most unique and original. Walk us through the whole thing. What do you see from a design perspective? What are they doing here?

Yeah, I think one thing we talk about is like you want to make sure you're simple. And one of the worst things you can do is have a complex pricing page. This maybe challenges that a bit. Like, there is a lot of complexity and density here. There's a lot of places to go, but it still maybe works. I think for their persona, detail is good. And there's even like, just within this pricing page, there's like a whole different section for add-ons. That there's a blog post for their pricing philosophy. There's another blog post for their sales philosophy, and that's just at the high level. Then here you see kind of an e-commerce-like layout where you see a product, you see different product images as if you're buying like something on Amazon. The two options are totally free or ridiculously cheap, which is again back to their voice and tone that they've really honed, cuts through the noise really well. You can tell their infrastructure right off the bat because they ask you to choose a cloud region and that they maybe provide a path for EU specifically. Social proof right off the bat with 366 companies, 76 companies having signed up today. And if you keep going down, like they hit you over the head with just how much you get for free. Um, like the discount side of it. And then a lot of detail, full plan comparison. There's a lot here. This is pretty normal, but they, they get into it for each product. You can see more and more detail if you'd like. So you can keep going, like this sends you to a specific feature page or product page with more pricing information or entitlement information. You see the add-ons here. And they show breakdown on like each add-on has usage-based elements to it. And then something I don't see that often is a competitive breakdown on the pricing page, just going after their competitors very directly, showing also, hey, you can— we work with other platform tools that you might want to use or other integrations. And then straight into reviews. So the reviews part again feels like e-commerce and then a pricing calculator too. So they, they're really throwing the, the kitchen cabinet or they're throwing everything at it. And FAQs as well. Like there's everything possible you could have on a pricing page is here.

E-commerce is a good word for it. I like, I also feel like the person who in PostHog who owns the pricing page must have had just so much fun with this. It really is like to me a very fun pricing page. And I kind of love what they're doing here with like old desktop software as sort of like a joke upon entry into the pricing page. Like I've never seen anybody make a joke on like the opening of a pricing page in B2B SaaS. And I think that's what I, one of the things that I appreciate them about, you know, from a tonal, tonal perspective. And you've mentioned that it does cut through the noise. Jazz, what is the pricing model here? Tell us a little bit about what you see from the standpoint of like, what is this company's price metric? How are they thinking through billable metrics? How are they packaging? What have you observed?

Yeah, I mean, well, I'll talk about a couple things. One, I'll kind of hit on the sort of pricing page observations a little bit. It is totally e-com and there's almost kind of like a reason for it. And it sort of relates to the price metric or relates to kind of like everything they're doing here. I think what's super interesting about what they're doing is you ordinarily see on a pricing page or feature comparison, you just don't see that here. And you obviously are seeing a totally like impulse-driven sort of like checkout experience, right? Social proof, like e-com experience, everything's sort of oriented around that. And I think what they're trying to do here in lots of ways is they're trying to just remove the friction. They're trying to remove the choice. And I think what they're asking you is they're saying, look, you can compare us to other tools, but like, why would you? Right? You could, you could look at our features, but why would you?

Right?

You should just check out and try us. And so it's kind of like this interesting experience where they're trying to say, look, this is an easy choice. There should be no consideration. You shouldn't talk to sales.

It shouldn't matter.

And I think this sort of relates to their price metric and it relates to kind of like what they're doing with these, these sort of products here. If you go down a little bit into their rates, right, right there. Yeah. Not only are they really cheap, not only are they really transparent, but what's sort of notable about what they're doing here is they're actually using price metrics that are a bit counterpositioned and they're counterpositioned in the sense that if you look at any other analytics tool or most of them, they often price in MTUs and they often price on an output metric that is, you know, for all intents and purposes, it's sort of like something that you might look at and it'd be more intuitive to a product person or a marketing person. This is way more intuitive to an engineer. And they're sort of doing that with everything, right? So like feature flags, it's per request. It's not per seat. Surveys, it's per response. Like, these are raw input metrics that basically get down to the metal, right? And so, like, they're doing all of these things that really try and move you towards just, like, removing the choice, right? And that's not to say that they haven't put consideration in this, right? Like, the bottom has a pricing calculator, but, like, no one's going to use that really. Like, if you go to the top, like, in the middle right here, like, there's a pricing calculator right here. Any one person likely not going to go use this, right? If you go to the product pages, right, they'll go super deep on features. Uh, they even have blog posts on like comparisons with other tools. Um, they go super, super deep if you get super into consideration, you care about that stuff. But honestly, like, I don't think most of their users, most of their signups ultimately care about that, or they care to actually think about that. Right. And so like, basically, ultimately, what are they doing? Right. It almost feels like they're trying to commoditize every one of these categories. And they're trying to make you feel like it doesn't matter what features we have. We have feature flags. Doesn't matter what features we have. We have surveys. It's just a thing. And that's, that's sort of like sort of notable and interesting about their approach here., and I think makes them quite competitive.

One of the things that Ben said was that he hears people talk about post-hoc a lot in the context of hobbyists or early-stage startups. And maybe to kind of piggyback on what you were just describing, Jas, if the company is pursuing this, you know, counterposition on price, commoditize multiple categories, make this really impulse-driven for an early-stage company. What would you suspect is like the biggest kind of challenge for the company to grow over time? Is it they start to run into a place where like it's difficult to expand as an early stage startup becomes a big startup? Or is it, you know, something else? Um, walk us through how you'd kind of think about how this sort of plays out from a competitive perspective against different market segments.

It's a really good question. I wonder how much of a problem they have upmarket. I think there's a couple of maybe things that maybe go against the selling motion here, or at least the strategy in the sense that as a company grows, you likely, they likely will want to talk to sales. There likely will be a higher touch model. And I think that, that will sort of affect this. I think given where they are from a pricing perspective, I don't think they have probably a graduation problem. I feel like they are so cheap that it's, it's sort of difficult to imagine that once they get to an enterprise scale, that this isn't still quite affordable versus the alternatives. I think maybe where they run into problems probably are, there are probably safer choices, quote unquote, like getting the LaunchDarkly, right? Getting the Amplitude. There are more, you know, power tools likely in the enterprise in the mid, in the high mid-market where they probably don't want to compete right now and they can't compete, right? In terms of the depth that those products go. And so like, if you are looking for pure experimentation, which you might mid-market and higher, right? You're probably going to want to go towards StatStick, right? Or some other sort of equivalent. If you are a marketing team, right? Right, that is doing a lot of surveys, you probably want Typeform, not some sort of basic survey product. So I think that, you know, as I think about it and I sort of riff on it, it seems like the problem they'll run into is when you aggregate lots of categories like this, it's great for a very small team that's moving really fast. But once that starts to become multiple teams with their own incentives and their own preferences, it starts to break up a little.

Gio, can we go back to the pricing page? Okay. Gio, if you scroll down a little bit, I'd love to kind of look at some of the decisions that they've made in the actual packaging schema. So if you go back to the plans here, um, what do you guys see here? Um, you know, one thing that I noticed is the description of the plans, totally free, ridiculously cheap, Starship Enterprise, like in some ways there's direct segmentation here from a marketing perspective, you know, obviously couched with their voice. On initial view, I wasn't quite sure if I were getting the entire cloud with session replay and analytics and flags.

I think you do get every product. There's a very clear overage model in our language. You get a bunch of stuff within this free tier. You can choose this package which caps you after that, or you can choose this package where you get all that stuff in the free tier and then you start getting charged for overages, or, you know, usage beyond those limits. And I think that ends up making it kind of simple where this comparison is not like, you know, do I get every product? Everyone gets every product. It's just you get these additional non-core features like 2FA and audit logs and how long is retention period and stuff. Projects are capped. You don't pay per project, interestingly. So classic Overage model, everyone gets every product, just choose what you need based on a smaller list. Otherwise you get the rest.

All of it.

Yeah.

I honestly, like, when I was going through it, it got like, I got like super tired going through this because it was like, like the add-ons that I didn't really get. Like I kept going these like product, like in these product pages and I was like, there's so much information here. And like, it was good, but it was also like, it almost felt like they didn't want you to read it, but it was like all there, you know? And, uh, so like, I don't really love it, but it's like maybe effective in the sense of people are like, it gets people to get so tired. They're just like, I'm just going to try it.

I think it's like the docs approach and Ben can speak to this. I'm sure most credibly, which is like nobody reads all the docs, but you should be able to look at the docs and know everything is there. Like you feel a certain level of credibility and assurance. Because yes, you're not going to read all that, but it's there for when I need it.

Yeah, I, I often liken this to like you've got a chainmail and people could stab you anywhere on the chainmail, right? It's like some products, it's just like one hard sheet of metal and you need to have that one thing be, you know, solid and protect your chest. But when you're selling dev tools, a lot of times like every buyer has a different thing they're going to kind of try to stab you on, right? And so this pricing page is like, yeah, it's like the chain mail, right? Like they don't know which thing, which buyer is going to come in and care about. So it's just all there.

It's just like such a funny analogy.

One of the things that, you know, if we kind of think about what they have to do from a pricing page perspective is they have to merchandise multiple products and they've chosen to go with this sort of kind of cloud or platform approach. They obviously have add-ons, but Do you think that kind of the decision here to say in the free plan, you get everything from analytics to data warehouse, to surveys, to session replays, to feature flags, to experiments is, is a really calculated decision that they made based on, like a lot of data? Or do we think that this was like more of strategic instinct from the founders? Developers are just going to love having all of this in one place. The lower the friction is, like the more they're going to buy into the multi-product offering. That's the way to do this to drive the most adoption.

I think it's an instinct. It's a founder-level earned insight. They've been building for a while, but they build really fast. Like that's what, that's one of the main selling points. Like you look at their marketing site, they're not saying like, hey, we do this one thing well. They're saying we do all the things. And oh, you have an idea for something we don't have? Well, it's in the roadmap. And the reason you want to choose us is we ship weirdly fast. We've been around for 5 years, but we'll literally show you the whole, everything we shipped every year. And it's a ton. And you'll get all of it. And that's, I think they're trying to say that the new generation of dev tools aren't point solutions. They're instead these massive. They call it like the product OS, or I mean, I guess they call it different things in different places, but you just get everything. That's like their key differentiator. So it makes sense that price can reflect that.

Ben, as an early stage developer, as you, a self-described startup journeyman, as you recently said, what do you think about this idea of product OS? You know, like does PostHog attract you for something like Feature Analytics and then expand your business with all these other tools?

I do think it's appealing to have multiple products under the same roof, right? Like, I think a lot of developers get— excuse me— frustrated by like SaaS proliferation because then you kind of have to integrate those tools with each other somehow. Like, Schematic kind of is trying to do the same thing, right? Like, our goal is to have you have less things you have to sign up for and connect the dots between in order to get multiple value props. Like, this is something I think PostHog does have as a value prop. It's like, yes, maybe X or Y analytics product on some vector could be considered better than PostHog, like, depending on your needs. But if you already have PostHog for feature management, there's a good chance that PostHog Analytics is actually going to be better for you because probably things just work out of the box with regards to like data integration within that product. So that's pretty appealing because like it just, some things you don't have to worry about as a developer. They should just work.

Gio, before we go on, I want to kind of start walking us across into add-ons, pricing philosophy, how do we sell. Anything else that y'all want to bring up on like this kind of core pricing page?

I mean, I'll just say like, I think, I think the chainmail analogy is probably related to this, but it feels like it's a lot. And there might be intention behind it and there might be data behind it, but it might just be chaos too. And that's okay. Cause I think that's their, like a lot, like part of their brand is like this sort of unpolished sort of like vibe that's like all about hogs and like animations and like crushing things and like moving fast. And like, I think that's, this is just like another example of it right here that I think is just really effective because of that.

So, yeah, I, you know, I actually think it probably takes a lot of, I think it's not by accident, put it that way. And it's, and it's not even, yeah, I think it's actually a polished, very intentional play. Maybe like the way they're organized, like there's some kind of like different people adding to this page and like maybe they're not, there's not like one unifying vision on the strategy of this page. But I don't know, I, I think it's, it's all intentional and it's all on purpose and it's all, there's, there is at least some overarching point of view that is drummed into every employee that comes across on every single asset, every single page of their website, every single part of their product. And yeah, I think it's all exactly as they want it to be. They don't even, they haven't misplaced one step.

You might be right.

Well, let's, so to that idea, like they haven't misplaced anything. Let's, let's carry into what, what they think is important to communicate. So they've communicated the PostHog cloud. They've also chosen to communicate add-ons, pricing philosophy, and how we do sales. So Gio, take us to add-ons. What are they communicating on the add-ons page?

Actually, one other thing just to mention before we go into that, one thing we haven't even talked about, which is actually quite interesting, is that they're open source first.

Yeah, that is probably— that's a huge mess. We should have brought that up at the beginning.

And they actually downplay that significantly. And kind of like all their marketing. Um, and I think increasingly so, but it's actually quite interesting if you dig into their OSS offering because they say they're open source, which they are. And they kind of like, you can actually self-host with a lot of constraints that push you to cloud. And so like their OSS sort of offering obviously is a funnel into this sort of experience, but there's probably a whole nother thing to dig into on that side in terms of how that motion developed and matured.

Maybe, maybe we do carry that into next episode because we could look at it from like, what is it like to expand from the open source offering into the paid cloud offering? Um, all right. So Gio, take us back into add-ons. Like they've communicated the pricing cloud. What are they trying to communicate with add-ons here?

It looks like the first one. This Teams add-on, which did I put that here too? This seems like features that they've gated for when you move on from being a solo developer or two developers and you now need, you're a little bit bigger. You need SSO, you want a white label, you need actual support that's timely. So this is like, you've grown up a bit. There's some compliance stuff. That one's a pretty common add-on.

Interesting name for that. Like, it's not like, usually it's a tier, you know?

Yeah, it's interesting that it's an add-on. It has a tier-like price. I think that's because of their overage model and stuff, and it just makes sense for them.

Well, one thing, when I saw that, one thing, the question that I immediately started asking myself was back to ACV. Because my assumption has been that with the majority of PostHogs paying customers, just to your point, I would guess roughly it's $1,000 a year. But if they're starting to see a lot of conversion into a Teams plan that's $450 a month, then of their 60,000+ 70,000+ users, if they have what, 20,000 that are on the Teams plan, they're a $100 million business?

Yeah.

I mean, the segmentation starts to get really interesting. Right. Like you're probably talking about the majority of their customers, 50,000, 60,000 that paying $100 a year. And then the rest are kind of like these high ACV teams type companies.

Yeah.

Looking at the rest of their add-ons, they have a whole new feature that they've decided not to bundle into their platform offering, which I wonder why. This maybe is like a B2C type feature.

I don't really, I can't say that with confidence, but this is like ID resolution. It's like quite expensive to deliver. So I'm sure they kind of like, it's kind of interesting because I haven't looked at the add-ons page deeply. One thing they might be doing is pulling out stuff that's expensive in their infrastructure to push down the price of the commodity.

That seems right. At least for certainly this one. I feel like this Teams one is not expensive. It's just, I I think they can go and get this. $450 a month for a certain segment is not a big number and they can increase their contract sizes.

Yeah, some of these add-ons are pretty like typical or borderline table stakes functionality for some of these categories. So it's kind of interesting that, yeah, it's, I didn't realize that till reading this page either that they're keeping their kind of price competitive entry level tier. Um, yeah, so like thin group analytics that this also is a pretty basic thing about analytics, right? Like Segment Calls has the group call. It's like a basic thing. I mean, again, to your point, Chaz, it is like costly to do, right? But interesting to cut that out.

Data Pipeline too. It's like, honestly, like what's interesting with these add-ons is like, and I wonder if you agree with Ben, but like. If you are a startup or a real business at all, like, you kind of need many of, like, probably a couple of these at least.

Yeah, yeah, you pretty much—

do you agree with that?

Yeah, I would almost say you need all of them. Maybe, I don't, I don't know, maybe you could get by for a while without the team one, but yeah, group analytics is going to be pretty limiting to not have.

Let's put that in a real scenario because we're not PostHog customers, but if you were seriously looking at PostHog today, what would you be must-have for you out of these add-ons?

We would probably be able to get away without Teams for a little bit longer, I think.

Yeah.

This is kind of the big, would be the biggest leap for us. But this is the kind of thing, like I was touching on this before, like trying to think of an example, but basically like these are the type of features that people monetize on when they're going from like a lower ACV customer that they're just trying to like build up a funnel for larger ACV customers later, you know, like if you need 2FA, you need 2FA, if you need SSO, you need SSO, right? Like, I mean, honestly, this last one about security assessment is a little weird to gauge. Yeah, in general, there's certain things, your audit logs that you just need or you don't need, right? I think you're willing to pay it for $450 a month. It's not the end of the world, but that's for, for PostHog, it's going to be a pretty big step up. I think the analytics ones, like, we would, we would use those add-ons now.

Yeah, if we didn't have segment, like, you would probably need profiles and we'd need group analytics.

Possibly what's going on here is evidence of like them having great retention because a lot of other products might unbundle these into separate add-ons, whereas they're able to say you need any of this, it's $450. Like all you need is an additional project beyond the 1 or the 6, $450. All you need is SSO, $450.

And we know—

really interesting.

I mean, like, we're not doing the onboarding experience this time, but I'm pretty interested because, like, my thesis is, like, all of this is oriented towards just sign up because it's exhausting to evaluate all this stuff. I'm super curious what the selling— what it looks like in product in terms of how they sell this stuff.

Yeah, I am too. I was just thinking the same thing. Um, all right, let's keep moving. What's this pricing philosophy tab all about? So we make a profit with every product. We aim to be the cheapest for each product at every scale compared to every major competitor. Back to the idea they're trying to commoditize all of these categories.

And they invite you to tweet them if you disagree.

That's right. We have, let's see, the company in general has significant revenue, over 60,000 customers. Runs default alive, meaning we're profitable. We aim to IPO rather than sell. So a ton of transparency about what they're trying to achieve from a strategic perspective. We don't rely on investors. Why are they stating this here?

Trust.

Well, I don't know if they have to at this point because they have, I would say maybe over 2 years, going back 2 years, maybe like their brand is really established now. They've been around longer than that, but I feel like maybe up until, yeah, I want to say 2 years ago, like people would have treated them as if like they're going to potentially go away soon. And that's, you know, like nobody wants to buy a tool and then have to buy a new tool a year from now. Like people are hesitant to try out startups' products if it's something that's costly to switch around.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So maybe it's a remnant from something a couple of years ago when startups would have said, what if you guys go out of business? Is the hypothesis there?

Yeah, I would almost say like this is even a little bit of a hint of them like wanting— sorry, I was mindfully clicking. This is almost maybe to me a little bit of a hint of like maybe wanted to move just a little more upmarket, you know, maybe not just early stage, maybe Series A too, just because like You know, to all startup people now, PostHog is like established. They're a brand. They're more trusted than, you know, whatever the analytics product coming out of this year's YC is, you know. But to like Series B, now all of a sudden they're like that much more risk-averse. So the fact that they have to say this almost in a way implies to me like they're going for more types of customers.

I think it comes back to their core philosophy, which is you buy one platform, not point solutions. And the future of SaaS infrastructure is you choose one platform. And the downside of that is way more risk. Like you're building your product around one company and you're saying to yourself, okay, they may not have everything that I need now, but they ship crazy fast. So they will soon. But I'm unlike with point solutions where I spread out my risk of relying on third-party solutions. I'm relying on just one. So it's up to them to tell you how trustworthy they are.

Well, and then the sort of the follow-on implication would be like, if we are asking you to trust us for all of this, for being your product operating system, you should know where we're headed.

Yeah.

Therefore, this is where we're headed.

It's a long-term bet. They want a long, a lifetime customer.

Jas, were you going to say something on that front?

Yeah, I mean, I think like certainly it's trust. I think it's a lot of it's community. I mean, like, I don't know, Gio, do you remember when Figma was like basically going through the Adobe transaction? And like, you know, I'm curious what you would have thought if they actually completed the transaction about Figma.

I was very bearish on the whole thing. I didn't want it to happen. I probably would have continued using it.

But you would have said this is going to turn into InDesign and be terrible.

Yeah, I was afraid of the outcome. I think it's a little bit apples and oranges in terms of moving from design tools is not as consequential probably. Like if you've built your product around this Instructure tool, it's harder to move off of it.

But yeah, like certainly I think there's definitely parts of that, but I think a lot of like some of it here is like Everyone has their ex-tool that got bought by another company and you're just like, goddamn it, it sucks now.

Yeah, you're not really supposed to say this, I feel like, but generally when like a startup sells themselves to a bigger company, everything gets worse, right? Like that's usually what happens.

Yeah.

Yeah, it's almost like they're trying to assure you not so much that they're not gonna die, but that they're not gonna get bought and become like It's on the tip of my tongue. I shouldn't say it, but part of the blank cloud, the blank cloud operating system. Atlassian was what I was going to say, but you know what I mean.

Yeah, it's like, yeah, exactly. It's like Trello being bought by Atlassian. You know, all my comparisons are like product tools, but you know what I mean? Like, it's like, it always just ruins it. It's like, it's a promise, right? Like, we're going to be weird and cool forever and you can be weird and cool with us forever as well. I think that's kind of like a big part of this message.

It might be GitHub though. You know, like some companies just, it works, but most of them doesn't.

Let's quickly go to how do we do sales and then we'll give our ratings for their pricing page. What are they doing with this page, Gio?

Again, I think they, this one's so funny. They spend a lot of time on How do we articulate our point of view in a way that is unique and funny and friendly? And here they're just like, you don't need to talk to sales. Why would you ever want to?

Why would you ever talk to any of these other companies that could provide these categorical software offerings like Session Replay?

And now they're just saying like, this is what it looks like elsewhere. And see how terrible it is. And like, we're going to give you tech, like companies sound like this dinosaur tech. And this is just silly. Like, it's just funny. And probably most people don't read through all this. It's not telling you anything about their product directly, but it's just, they have such a strong identity and they find all these creative ways to do it. And they know, I think intrinsically, they know that like, it's not bad time spent. Like when I look at this from design product standpoint, like there's a bunch of unique illustrations. There's a lot of really thoughtful copy. Like this took them a while to do. And why did they decide to spend all that much time and money on it? I think they just know that any time they spent on solidifying their tone and their point of view is like well spent.

Yeah, as I thought about this, like, and Benji, I was curious, like, would reading this attract you to PostHog if you were like actually out in the market looking for a product that PostHog could solve for? But for me, what this did is it entertained me and it made me feel like they were actually invested in trying to entertain people in the context of a purchasing decision.

Yeah, I think they, I definitely am more in the category of like, I'm gonna read that tome of pricing page docs or what have you and figure out what I need to know. But you've got to respect the, you know, commitment to the bit, right?

I think anyone does the commitment to the bit.

Yeah, I think, I think the other thing that's like, I think this page is hilarious. I think it's like super funny and really well done and just like beautiful. But, um, I also think that like what's interesting about them is that like, I think for a long time they probably, they probably like, there's a certain type of person that was like, they appeal to probably, but I think they've sort of like, like sort of transitioned to being tastemakers in lots of ways. Like you almost read this page and you're like, you kind of read it and you're like, should I ever be talking to sales? Like maybe I should like. Maybe I should buy like this. And like, I, you know, I'm pretty dumb for wanting to schedule a call, you know what I mean? And like, it's really effective at doing that because it's so funny that it sort of like makes you believe their point of view beyond just like adhering to a point of view, which I think is really awesome.

Yeah, they know who they are and they constantly doubling down on it.

Yes. Commitment to the bit. That maybe is the name of the episode. Okay. We've got 7 minutes left. It's time to give our grades. As always, we grade the pricing page on a scale of 1 to 5. 1 is terrible. 5 is incredible. If you throw less than a 5, you gotta maybe kind of articulate what would get them to a 5 for you. We'll kick it off with, I'm gonna pick somebody and then after you go, you popcorn it. So we'll kick it off to Ben. Ben, what would you give PostHog's pricing page?

Yeah, I want to give them A 5, I think. Um, I just think there's so much of a pull to be kind of like this, have consistency of design, like follow design patterns, quote unquote. The fact that they have, like we've talked about with their tone, everything they do is just kind of like so distinctive. I think that's something to kind of reward. Despite that, I do feel like the page is completely clear. Like, I don't look at this and think like, this is a unique design and now I'm confused. To me, they're conveying the information they need to convey and doing it with a lot of style, you know, which is very uncommon.

Yeah, I'm— I think it's also really well done. I mean, maybe I would dock like 2 tenths 4.8, just to say, to Jazz's point about like, how might you make this a little bit more streamlined? I think that their whole design philosophy is to not worry about that, to just keep adding on and adding on. And they do a good job with that. And with their persona, there's more tolerance for that. But probably if they took a step back and looked at how this is getting used and there's probably some ways to simplify this more. And like, I don't even know how that would look, but from a design standpoint, there's probably a way to simplify it and still retain their quirkiness and their point of view, but maybe just don't overload me fully. Like, I won't take more than 2/10 off because I'm not even sure how to do that, but That's one place to push on. Popcorn and jazz.

Yeah, jazz, take a square.

Oh, maybe I should give it a 5 because Ben thinks the page is really clear and that's kind of all that matters if he's like the buying persona here, but I kind of, I'm sort of tempted to give it a 4 because like as a pricing page, it's not that effective for me. Like it just like, it's so much. As a, as like a brand marketing page, incredible. Like it's a 5 for that, right? Like it's like super good at that. And I think what's super interesting of the last like 3 that we've done, or all the ones that we've done so far, I don't know if this occurred to me as I like before I like we started doing this, but like the pricing page as a like extension of brand is like so prominent and so effective. Um, and I, I think that's what they've done really well with this.

I agree with I think that's a really important observation, especially now that we've done a good handful of these. Like, this is a brand asset. Um, I'll give them a 5. I mean, like, if you just look at the fundamentals of a pricing page here, they have nailed the fundamentals. Like, they have the FAQ, they have the tiers, they have the transparency, they have like really clear value prop, they have comparison to competitors, they have exceptional social proof, like in a number of different ways. Like, what more could you ask for from a pricing page? Then they've topped it off with like all of this brand. And then I think like that's where like you run into like, you know, stylistic preferences depending on who's, you know, running into this pricing page. But, you know, if you're compelled by their irreverence, by their tone, by their bit, by their humor, I think it's probably quite a powerful asset for the business. So I'll throw the 5. This has been really fun. And I think next week's going to be extremely interesting as we look into kind of what it's like to purchase this product. You don't have to put a credit card in, obviously, to get started. And so we're going to go as deep as we can on the purchasing experience next week. Thank you guys for being a part of this and look forward to the next one.