Corrections Policy

Last updated: September 15, 2026

The short version

Prices change and we get things wrong. When we do, we fix it in public and say what changed. Every correction we have made is logged at the bottom of this page.

How we source pricing

Every price on this site comes from the vendor's own public pricing page, read on the date shown on each review. That date is the "last verified" stamp you see on tool and comparison pages.

Screenshots, sales decks, and figures a vendor sends us are never the source of record. We use them as a pointer, then check the live page ourselves before anything changes.

Submitting a correction

Anyone can submit one, including the vendors we cover. Email hello@meetingstack.io with three things: the page, the claim you think is wrong, and a link to the primary source.

We read everything. We do not promise to agree.

How we handle vendor submissions

A vendor telling us we are wrong is useful. They usually are the first to notice. So we treat their submissions like anyone else's, with two extra rules.

We verify independently. If a vendor says a competitor's effective price is higher than we published, we go and read the competitor's pricing page, not the vendor's summary of it.

We publish what we find in both directions. Checking one claim usually turns up others, and some of those go against the vendor who raised it. Those get published too, in the same update.

What we will not do

  • No paid placement. Position in any list is never for sale.
  • No pre-publication approval. No vendor decides what runs. The one exception: a named interview subject may read a draft to check facts and any off-record boundaries before it publishes. Editorial judgement stays with us, and the piece says when that happened.
  • No removing an accurate fact because a vendor dislikes it.
  • No quiet edits. Anything material appears in the log below.

Relationships and disclosure

If we have any relationship with a vendor beyond reading their website, we say so on the affected page. That covers interviews, hosted visits, review access, and anything commercial. The disclosure sits at the top of the page, not in a footnote.

Corrections log

April 8, 2026 · Cisco Webex and FedRAMP

Our Webex article said Webex is "often the only platform that clears the compliance bar" for government work and that "no other platform matches the government compliance stack". Wrong. Zoom for Government, Microsoft Teams GCC High, and Google Workspace all hold FedRAMP authorizations. The exclusivity claims were removed. The error flattered a vendor and we corrected it unprompted.

April 9, 2026 · Nine unverifiable claims across three articles

A sweep found figures we could not source and removed or softened them: a Fathom user count, an Otter G2 rating movement and a "below 4.0 buyers stop shortlisting" rule, an Otter user and revenue figure, a Gong valuation, named likely acquirers, a Granola public-link exposure written as a confirmed security finding that we could not trace to any investigation, and allegations from an Otter class action stated more firmly than the filing supports. A chart caption was relabelled "rough estimates".

August 2, 2026 · Site claims that were not true

The site layout carried an "All systems operational" indicator that was connected to nothing. It was removed. The About page stat "Tools reviewed" became "Tools cataloged", because most tools have a profile, not a review. The About page's "minimum two-week evaluation" claim and its claim that every review page carries a last-verified date were removed. Both were untrue.

August 11, 2026 · Skribby transcription pricing

We published Skribby's transcription range as $0.39 to $0.70 per hour and described their model list as "10+". Their live pricing lists 30 models topping out at $1.36 per hour. Corrected across the Skribby review, the Skribby vs Recall.ai comparison, the meeting bot API hub, the notetakers directory, and the MeetingBaaS pricing breakdown. Source: skribby.io/pricing.

August 11, 2026 · Skribby price comparison

We said Skribby undercuts Recall.ai by 30%. That compared Skribby's audio-only base rate against Recall.ai's full included feature set. Matched like for like, with video and real-time, Skribby is $0.45 per hour against Recall.ai's $0.50, a 10% gap. Which provider is cheaper all-in depends on the transcription model: Skribby wins with its cheaper models and costs more than Recall.ai with its premium ones.

August 11, 2026 · Skribby storage

We listed "recording storage included" without qualification. Skribby includes one week. Extending to one year costs $0.05 per hour. We have also added the comparison point that Recall.ai's published storage rate covers 30 days, with no one-year rate published.

August 11, 2026 · Recall.ai startup pricing

Our Recall.ai review predated their startup program and did not mention it. Early-stage teams can apply for $0.25 per hour on their first 10,000 hours. We have also noted that volume discounts exist but that the rates are not published. Source: recall.ai/pricing. Submitted by Recall.ai, verified independently.

August 11, 2026 · Recall.ai diarization claim

The Recall.ai profile listed "100% speaker diarization" as a feature and "perfect speaker diarization" as a pro. Neither is a claim we can test. Both now describe the mechanism instead: Recall.ai captures a separate audio stream per participant, so speaker attribution comes from the stream rather than from a model. Logged here on September 7; the change shipped August 11 and was missing from this page until then.

August 11, 2026 · Unsourced Recall.ai estimates removed

Our MeetingBaaS pricing breakdown carried an estimated monthly cost for Recall.ai's volume-discounted Launch tier, and claimed those tiers become the most competitive option at scale. Recall.ai does not publish volume rates, so neither claim could be sourced. Both are gone.

August 11, 2026 · Nylas monthly minimum

We listed Nylas Notetaker at $0.70 per hour without noting the $5 per month minimum that includes the first 300 minutes. Added. Source: nylas.com/pricing.

August 17, 2026 · Recall.ai startup program page

When we logged the startup rate on August 11 the only source was a line in Recall.ai's pricing FAQ. Recall.ai has since published a dedicated page for the program, so that is now the source we cite and link. Reading it changed one recommendation: our MeetingBaaS pricing breakdown left Recall.ai out of the under-100-meetings bracket, and at $0.40 per hour all-in it belongs there, ahead of Skribby once video is matched. The page publishes no eligibility criteria, so we say who the rate is for only as far as Recall.ai does.

Updated later the same day: the sentence above was wrong. The page does say who the program is for, in qualitative terms, early-stage, meeting data core to the product, and building a product around recorded conversations. What it sets is no headcount or funding threshold. We have corrected the MeetingBaaS pricing breakdown to match and left the original wording here rather than overwrite it. Source: recall.ai/startups.

September 15, 2026 · Circleback pricing and its free plan

Our Circleback entry listed "Free trial / Starter $16.99 / Pro $29.99" and said in seven places that the product had no permanent free tier. All of it was out of date. Circleback runs four tiers per user per month: a genuine free plan, Pro at $15, Business at $25, and Enterprise at $35. The free plan covers unlimited meetings with 30-day history, in-person capture, and API access. The pricing breakdown, the review, the FAQ, and the cons list were all corrected, and the value grade moved from B+ to A- because the only weakness it cited, the missing free tier, does not exist. The error ran against the vendor and we corrected it unprompted.

September 7, 2026 · This policy, the methodology page, and the Recall.ai profile

Changes made before publishing our Recall.ai interview, all of them about our own pages.

  • The "no pre-publication approval" rule above now states its one exception: a named interview subject may check a draft for facts and off-record boundaries. We had promised that to Recall.ai on tape, so the policy had to say so. The methodology page's independence section says the same.
  • The methodology page said each tool "gets hands-on testing with real meeting recordings", that we "test actual integrations", that comparisons use "same meeting recordings, same test accounts", that prices are "checked quarterly" and updated "within one business day", and that we "re-verify reviews quarterly". None of that was true. It now says what we do: benchmark transcription accuracy, desk-research the rest, and re-check when a change is flagged.
  • The Recall.ai profile called volume discounts "sales-gated". Recall.ai's stated reason for not publishing them is that startup and enterprise discounts differ too much to list; the profile now says that.
  • The profile's strengths paragraph and one data field still said "100% accurate" speaker attribution after the August 11 change. Both now describe the mechanism.
  • The profile said Recall.ai processes "3+ TB/sec of raw video" and launches "8M+ EC2 instances monthly". We could not find a source for either figure. Replaced with what Recall.ai's engineering blog says: terabytes per second across many thousands of instances. The employee count changed from "~30" to a 30 to 40 estimate, which is what third-party trackers show.
  • This page was hidden from search engines and the sitemap until today. It is now linked from the footer.

Spotted something else? Email hello@meetingstack.io.