Why we only charge for successful takedowns
Success-based pricing isn't a discount gimmick — it's an alignment mechanism. Here's why we tie our billing to the only metric that matters.
Most security spending is measured in activity: reports filed, alerts triaged, hours logged. The problem with activity metrics is that they reward motion, not outcomes. A vendor can file a hundred reports and remove nothing, and still look busy.
The only metric that matters
For a takedown, there is exactly one outcome worth paying for: the malicious content is gone and stays gone. Everything else — the report, the escalation, the follow-up — is just the work required to get there. So we bill for the outcome, not the work.
What success-based billing forces
Tying revenue to removals changes the incentives on our side:
- We have to target the layer that actually works (host, registrar, CDN), not just the easiest one to file against.
- We have to escalate stalled cases instead of letting them sit closed-but-not-resolved.
- We have to verify removal, because a case that reappears isn't a success.
If we don't get the content down, you don't pay. That sentence is only safe to write if every part of the process is built to actually finish the job.
What it means for you
No minimums, no multi-year lock-in, no charge for a filing that went nowhere. You send the target, we do the work, and the invoice only appears when the content is confirmed offline. It's a simple promise, but it only works because the incentive points the same direction as your goal: removal, verified.