GoFeed vs Sendible: when the price is counted by client

How each one counts

Sendible was among the first agency tools to stop charging by seat. Its plans carry unlimited users on every tier, which sounds like a gift and is really a change of unit: what gets counted is not people but workspaces, and a workspace is a brand or a location. In practice, a client.

GoFeed counts something else. The price belongs to the whole workspace and the limits belong to the workspace rather than to each person inside it. Adding somebody to the team moves nothing, the same as in Sendible, but adding a client does not change tier by itself either: what has a ceiling is connected accounts, of which every brand takes at least one, and those ceilings are read from the catalogue rather than off a card.

Sendible's ladder, and where these figures come from

This has to be said before anything else. Sendible's pricing page draws its cards with JavaScript, and the reading taken on 8 September 2026 could not extract the amounts: the structure of tiers, profiles and users was confirmed directly from the page's own HTML, but the price figures in the table below come from a secondary source, an indexed snippet of the same domain, not from a direct reading of the rendered page. They are treated here as indicative rather than as the provider's official price.

Prices checked on 8 September 2026: Sendible.

What does come from the page itself, with nothing in between, is the shape: every tier carries a closed number of workspaces and profiles, and the site announces payment frequency discounts of 5 % quarterly, 7 % half yearly and 15 % annually. The top two tiers published no amount at the time of the reading, so no invented figure appears here.

What happens when client number four arrives

This is the conversation people actually have. The Plus plan covers three workspaces, which is to say three clients, with 18 social profiles shared between them. The fourth client does not fit, and it makes no difference whether it is a hairdresser with a single Instagram account or a chain with six profiles: getting them in means moving up to Premium, which jumps to seven workspaces and 42 profiles.

The jump is the expensive part. You are not paying for one more client, you are paying for four spare workspaces and 24 profiles you probably will not use for a year. And when client number nine calls, the story repeats one floor higher, on a tier whose price is not even published in a readable way.

A model that counts brands and connected accounts behaves differently at that moment: the small client consumes one brand and one account, which is exactly what it brings. That is not better on principle, it is just that the rounding error is smaller. Neither model is free of the problem, because every ceiling eventually gets reached, but they reach it at different speeds and for different reasons. One reacts to how many logos you handle, the other to how much work those logos generate, and an agency with a long tail of tiny local accounts feels those two things very differently at the end of the quarter. If you are adding up the cost of several pieces at once, the whole reckoning is in the social media stack cost guide, which totals the set rather than looking at each subscription on its own.

Set side by side, the two ladders stop being a feature argument and become one about what each of them counts on the day a client arrives.

Tiers are missing above on purpose. Core carries a single workspace, which is one brand rather than an agency, and the two above Premium published no readable amount. The two figures that do appear are still the secondary source ones from the section above, not a direct reading of their page, so treat them as guidance and confirm them on their site before signing anything.

With that in front, the two columns do not measure the same thing. The left one is in dollars, counts client workspaces, and in Premium's case is the monthly equivalent of annual billing with the frequency discount already applied; on top of it sits white label, which is a paid add-on rather than a tier. The right one is what the whole workspace costs, in euros and net of IVA, the value added tax charged in Spain, with no charge per seat and none per post, and with client portal accounts outside the member count altogether.

What fits in neither column is what decides. On Sendible's side, unlimited users from the cheapest plan and Client Connect, which close this article. On ours, tasks, team chat and the Spanish commercial block, quotes, contracts and invoices with your own numbering series and your own IVA, which its pricing page does not mention at all.

White label is not a report with your logo on it

There is a confusion here that the whole category feeds. "White label" is used for two very different things: a PDF report carrying your logo at the top, and an entire panel the client signs into without seeing the provider's name anywhere. The first is layout; the second changes who the client appears to be buying from.

In Sendible, white label does not come with the tiers in the table: it is a paid add on and it appears attached to the higher plans. The page published an amount for that add on that contradicted itself between the two payment variants, so it is not reproduced here. What is verifiable is that it is paid for separately and that it is not in the base.

In GoFeed, branding is a pack covering the portal, the emails and the documents that go out under your name, and it is available in agency and in house workspaces. A solo creator does not need it because there is nobody on the other side to show it to, and offering it would be dishonest.

One yes, and the client can give it

Sendible has team assignment and approval from the Plus plan, and it has a feature called Client Connect that deserves respect: the client links their own social profiles without sharing passwords with you. That solves a real and slightly awkward problem, the one where you ask somebody for their credentials over email.

In GoFeed a post needs one yes, and there is no order to it. Somebody on your team can approve the piece from the app, or the client can, signing into their portal with their own account, seeing what is going to be published exactly as it will be published, and either approving it or sending it back with a comment stuck to the piece. Whichever comes first counts. A rejected post returns to the calendar carrying the reason.

The client side needs the portal, which is an agency workspace feature, and approval is switched on per client: for one who does not need to review, posts are scheduled straight away. An in house workspace has no clients, so every post waits for one teammate's yes. How all of it links together, from the calendar to publishing on the fourteen networks, is on the calendar and publishing page.

How each one is paid for

Sendible discounts by payment frequency and counts workspaces. GoFeed charges per workspace, with VAT included in the price, no minimum term and nothing charged per post. The limits belong to the whole workspace: members, storage, connected social accounts, ad accounts and the contacts reached by the DM automation. Brands have no limit of their own: each one takes at least one connected account.

Of those five quotas, four are hard ceilings and one is soft. The automation contacts block nothing when they run out: the automation keeps sending, and the entry tier is the only one that carries a ceiling at all, while the ones above it do not. The current figures live on the pricing page, which reads the live catalogue, which is why they are not printed here.

The trial runs fourteen days on a card that is not charged until day 15, with one brand, one connected account and a ceiling of ten posts that does not reset. Sendible gives the same 14 days and asks for no card, and that is an advantage: two weeks is enough to put a real client through it and see what happens on a Monday morning.

What Sendible does better

Four concrete things, and none of them is a courtesy.

The first is unlimited users on every plan, including the cheapest. An agency rotating interns, freelancers and weekend help does not have to think twice or ask anybody for one more seat. It is a brave product decision and they hold it from the very bottom of the ladder, not as a reward at the top.

The second is Client Connect. Letting the client link their own profiles without handing you a password solves a security problem and a liability problem at once, and not every tool in this category has that sorted.

The third is mileage. Sendible has spent more than a decade polishing the same product, and that turns into a long integration list, odd cases already solved, and an agency workflow that has survived a great many API changes. A younger product competes on other ground.

The fourth is the 14 day trial without a card, as long as ours but with nothing asked up front, and enough to get through two complete approval cycles with a real client.

What neither of them settles equally is worth saying too: Sendible carries no tasks with dependencies, no team chat, no CRM and no quotes or invoices, and its pricing page mentions VAT nowhere. If your problem is work leaking between five subscriptions, that comparison is open in the Sendible alternatives round up, where four more names appear alongside the same question as always: which unit are you paying for.