Pricing a build when your searches need a tool

Your payment covers a written brief turned into a working web app, not a subscription you renew each month. The build includes the parts a recruiting tool needs to function: stored candidate data, logins for the people who use it, and payments if you charge for access. Because the tiers are counted in apps, the money maps to finished tools rather than time.

Consider what a narrow specialism actually requires. You want candidates filtered by role and location without the list going stale between searches. A build from a clear brief can hold that data and the logins that guard it, so the spend goes toward a tool shaped around your market instead of a general database you rent.

The store attached to the platform is where every lifetime deal in this space is sold. That matters for budgeting, because you can compare what a slot buys against other offers before you commit. Nothing in the pricing is expressed per seat or per month, so the figure you see relates to a count of builds.

Moving up the tiers changes one thing: how many apps your lifetime covers. The entry tier gives you one app, the middle tier gives you three, and the top tier gives you ten. Each slot is a separate build, so the climb is about breadth of tools rather than more access to the same one.

Think about how a recruiter's work splits across tools. You might want one app for searching by role and location, another for tracking conversations with candidates, and a third for something specific to your specialism. Each of those is a distinct build, and each consumes a slot, which is why the larger tiers exist.

The work included in a build does not change between tiers. Data storage, logins and payments are part of the app itself, not an add-on reserved for higher tiers. What you are buying as you climb is the number of finished builds you can commission over the life of the deal, nothing more.

Your objection is staleness, and it is a fair one. Databases that are out of date by the time you search them waste the hours you spend sourcing. A build from your own brief can be structured around the fields and filters your specialism needs, so the data you hold is the data you chose to keep.

That said, a build does not maintain itself. The app gives you somewhere to store and search candidate information, but someone still has to keep it current. Read the tier as the cost of the tool, and treat the upkeep as your own process rather than something the purchase handles for you.

The hesitation also touches timing. A written brief has to be specific enough to build from, and more involved briefs go through review before anything ships. That step protects you from a half-formed tool, but it does mean the app is not instant. Plan around the review rather than expecting a same-day result.

Start by counting the tools you genuinely need, not the ones you might want later. If one app can hold your candidate search, the logins and any payment flow, the single-app tier is the honest choice. If your specialism clearly needs two or three separate tools, the three-app tier saves you buying twice.

The jump from three to ten apps only makes sense if you have a pipeline of briefs. A recruiter running one desk in one market rarely needs ten builds. A recruiter expanding into adjacent specialisms, each with its own tool, might. Be realistic about how many briefs you can write well, because a slot you never use is money you did not need to spend.

Whichever tier you pick, the store rules apply to the purchase and sit alongside the tier itself. Read them before you pay. Compare the tiers against the published table on the site, match the count to your plans, and buy the smallest tier that covers the work you can actually describe.