Fame publish $2,500 to $5,000 a month to run a B2B podcast end to end, guests included. We publish $2,000 for up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos. Here is where each one earns its money.
Everything below about Fame comes from their own public pages, read on 24 September 2026. Check it yourself
Fame are one of the very few agencies in this whole category who put a price on their own website, and I want to lead with that because it is rarer than it should be, so on their site, which I read on 24 September 2026, they publish from $2,500 to $5,000 a month depending on episodes per month, typically two to four, and scope.
What that buys is genuinely broad. They describe guest sourcing and booking, guest research and preparation, audio and long-form video editing, snippet video creation, human-reviewed transcripts, SEO, organic social, partnerships, paid platforms and cold email, all wrapped in what they call Fame OS with a dedicated strategist and project manager, and they publish a guarantee on top, which is that if they do not average 10% month-over-month growth over six months, month seven is free.
We sell a different shape of thing, $2,000 a month for a ceiling of up to 200 short-form videos and 30 long-form videos with thumbnails included, produced by close to 50 editors in-house in Dubai, so the honest comparison is not really which is cheaper, right, it is whether you are buying a show with a pipeline attached or a machine that turns recordings into a lot of published content.
Their column is what Fame publishes, ours is what we publish. Where they do not state something, the row says so instead of guessing.
| Pixel Samy Studio | Fame | |
|---|---|---|
| Published pricing | $2,000 a month entry point | From $2,500 to $5,000 a month, depending on episodes and scope |
| Episode volume assumed | Up to 30 long-form videos a month, plus up to 200 short-form | Typically 2 to 4 episodes a month |
| Guest sourcing | Not something we do | Sourcing and booking guests, guest research and preparation |
| Clips and snippets | Up to 200 short-form videos a month inside the entry price | Snippet video creation included, with 10K+ social clips quality checked all time |
| Guarantee | No growth guarantee, because nobody can honestly promise platform outcomes | Average 10% month-over-month growth over six months, or month seven is free |
| Where the team sits | Close to 50 in-house editors in Dubai | Globally distributed, stated as 69 people across 16 countries |
| Paid promotion | Not something we do | Paid platforms and cold email listed under promotion |
The number I keep coming back to on their page is the episode count, typically two to four a month, because that is the shape of a classic B2B interview show and it tells you what the money is really buying.
At that cadence, the expensive parts are not the edits, they are the guest calendar, the research, the preparation and the promotion, and a strategist plus a project manager plus an outreach function is a real team doing real work, so $2,500 to $5,000 for that is not an unreasonable number at all.
Our ceiling assumes a different rhythm. Up to 30 long-form videos and 200 short-form videos a month is not an interview show, it is a publishing operation, and it usually comes from a founder recording in focused blocks rather than booking thirty separate guests.
The catch here is that these two rhythms produce very different outcomes. A guest show builds relationships with the guests and reaches their audiences. A publishing operation builds an audience of your own that compounds. Most founders want the second and buy the first, because the first is easier to imagine, right, and then they wonder why the numbers stay flat after eight months.
Fame publish that if they do not average 10% month-over-month growth over six months, month seven is free, and I want to treat that fairly rather than wave it away.
It is a genuine commitment, it is specific, and it gives a buyer something to hold. It also tells you something about the model, which is that a show growing from a small base can hit 10% a month fairly reliably early on, because the first hundred listeners are much easier than the ten thousandth, and the remedy is one free month rather than a refund.
We do not publish a growth guarantee and I would rather explain why than pretend it is a philosophical stance. We do not control the platforms, we do not control whether your on-camera answers are interesting, and a studio that guarantees reach either prices the risk into the fee or defines growth loosely enough to always win.
What we will commit to is output, which is the part we actually control. The ceiling is published, the team is on our payroll, and if the volume does not arrive that is our failure and a fair reason to leave, and to be very honest that is the only kind of promise I think a production studio can make with a straight face.
Fame describe a team of 69 people across 16 countries, which is a real operating model and it has advantages I will happily list, because a distributed team means follow-the-sun coverage, local language nuance and the ability to hire the best person for a niche rather than the best person within commuting distance.
Ours is the opposite bet. Close to 50 editors in-house in Dubai, in one building, on our payroll, and the reason we made that bet is consistency. Your voice is the product in founder-led content, and an editor who has cut forty of your videos knows which pause is you thinking and which tangent is worth keeping, and that knowledge compounds when the same people stay on the account.
It also decides what happens on a bad week. When a launch moves or a recording lands late, a producer can walk across the room and reshuffle the queue, which is a different thing from coordinating five contractors across five timezones.
Neither model is automatically better and anybody who tells you otherwise is selling. The honest question is whether your content needs deep familiarity with one person's voice, or broad coverage across many formats and markets, and those pull in different directions.
Let me do the arithmetic with both published numbers, because this is the honest way to compare two services that are not the same shape.
Take their middle, say $3,000 a month for a show at three episodes. If those three episodes produce, generously, thirty snippets plus three long-form cuts, you are at roughly ninety dollars per published asset, and you are also buying guest booking, promotion and attribution, which are not assets at all, they are business development.
Take ours at $2,000 with the ceiling used properly, so thirty long-form pieces and a hundred and fifty shorts, and you are under twelve dollars per published asset, and you are buying none of the guest booking, promotion or attribution.
So neither number is better in the abstract, they are answers to different questions. If the value of the show is fifty two conversations with prospects, cost per asset is the wrong measure entirely and you should ignore it. If the value is a founder becoming unavoidable on four platforms, then cost per asset is exactly the measure, and that is the game we are built for.
And the honest caveat on our side, again, is that the ceiling only helps if your raw material supports it, because two hundred thin clips from one thin recording is not a win, it is just noise with your face on it.
Ask one question first, which is what the show is for, and be blunt about the answer.
If it is for relationships and pipeline with named accounts, then the guest engine is the product and you should be comparing Fame against a BDR function rather than against a production studio, and by that comparison their pricing looks quite reasonable.
If it is for audience and inbound, then the number of finished, findable pieces you publish every month is the thing that matters most, and at two to four episodes a month you are not going to get there no matter how good the editing is.
And the arrangement I have seen work best for companies with budget for both is to let a specialist run the guest show while a studio like ours turns everything, the show, the webinars, the internal talks, the conference sessions, into a continuous stream of published assets, because the recordings are already being made and almost nobody is using more than a tenth of them.
The useful version of this page, because a comparison where the other studio never wins is a comparison nobody believes.
Go with Fame when the podcast is a pipeline instrument for a B2B company and you want somebody else owning the guest calendar, the promotion and the reporting that justifies the spend internally, because that whole apparatus is what they have built and it is a lot of moving parts to assemble yourself.
Their guarantee is also worth taking seriously. Publishing a specific growth number with a specific remedy is a real commitment, and if you are the person who has to defend this budget to a CFO next quarter, having that in writing is genuinely useful in a way that no amount of craft talk is.
Come to us when the show already exists, or when the recordings are easy for you to make, and the actual gap is that two to four episodes a month is not producing enough published content to move anything.
That is the whole argument for a ceiling model, because four recordings a month with proper clipping is somewhere between sixty and a hundred and twenty publishable assets, and our $2,000 covers up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form pieces, so the cost per published asset lands somewhere most agencies cannot reach, and you can see how that pipeline runs on our podcast editing page.
Content Allies use a B2B podcast to start conversations with the people you want as customers. We turn recordings into a month of content across every platform. Different jobs, and worth knowing which one you need.
Sweet Fish run video for B2B marketing teams with a dedicated crew per client. We run a published volume ceiling for founders. The honest difference is who the buyer inside your company is.
This is the closest comparison on the site, because both of us take a recording and hand back the edit, the clips, the thumbnails and the uploads. The differences are volume, price transparency and who is in the building.
Vidpros sells you a dedicated editor's hours every workday. We sell a finished content operation with a volume ceiling on top. Here is the honest split, with both sets of published numbers.
If you are weighing a full-service show against a production engine, tell me how many recordings a month you can realistically make, and I will tell you which of those two is the better use of the budget. So yeah. That's my way of saying it.