I've always wanted to know: Are people actually interested in more granular pricing options? I.e. give me 10x more tokens but miss me with that image generation, or give me more bandwith but still only one domain. It feels like nowadays 80% of stuff in pricing packages isn't really used by people paying for it, but they can't opt out of it...
One of my biggest peeves in pricing pages is the "feature diff". There are so many redundant features listed between tiers - or products - that many would be better off not showing features that are largely the same.
I didn't dig through the infinite scroll (ironic on a page about designs) but I'm surprised more than half of them weren't dedicated to obfuscating the prices, as has been the vast majority of my experience with trying to figure out how much money I need to give anyone
I love pricing pages, I avoid landing pages or whatever they want to me read and go directly to pricing page to get the meat of what they offer... then I look at price.
I don't know if they were the first but I think of 37signals and Basecamp as the ones that first nailed the multi-column/highlighted plan form of design that has become so dominant.
Also interesting: they list their plans, from left to right, from most expensive to least expensive (and their current plan pages do the same). I feel like that's rare? I can't remember the last pricing page I've seen that lists it that way, aside from these. All the ones I can (dimly) recall start with the cheapest (or free) option on the left.
It's probably too much work, but it would be nice to see a short comment on the "curated" examples to better understand the reasoning behind the assessment. Why was it included ? What was particularly good about it? That might help people choose the right ones for their use case.
This is the second most important page on your website. The first is a clear description of the product. Without a pricing page people immediately think your pricing and contracts are predatory and probably covering up product deficiencies with contractual lockins.
The "style" tags/filters don't seem to be very good. The definitions of them aren't very clear from the names alone, and I can't really tell what they are from the examples within the category. Would be great to have a definition and a basic wireframe example of each style.
I'd also love to be able to filter out a style, to drill down to the examples that aren't just the multi-tier ("free/basic/pro/enterprise") vertical cards (which doesn't seem to have a dedicated style tag—maybe "Stacked Cards"? but there's a lot that look like that that don't have that tag).
21 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 42.2 ms ] threadhttps://www.paywallscreens.com/
<font size=small>call us</font>
<h3>let's talk!</h3>
or my other pet peeve https://lucidic.ai/#:~:text=Get%20started%20for%20free aka don't worry about it until you like it!
Here's 2009: https://web.archive.org/web/20090307125843/http://www.baseca...
if you go back to 2007 you can see the same structure in a plainer presentation; it's easy to see how they went from one to the other: https://web.archive.org/web/20070831191822/http://www.baseca...
Pretty interesting!
https://opengraphexamples.com/
Collection of open graph image examples.
I'd also love to be able to filter out a style, to drill down to the examples that aren't just the multi-tier ("free/basic/pro/enterprise") vertical cards (which doesn't seem to have a dedicated style tag—maybe "Stacked Cards"? but there's a lot that look like that that don't have that tag).