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.
Everything below about Podcast Monkey comes from their own public pages, read on 24 September 2026. Check it yourself
Podcast Monkey are the closest thing on this page to what we actually do, and I would rather say that plainly than pretend otherwise, because on their site, which I read on 24 September 2026, the scope is video-first and it lines up with ours almost item for item, a full-length video podcast edit with colour grading, audio cleanup and graphics, vertical clips of fifteen to sixty seconds for Shorts, custom thumbnails for each episode, keyword-aware titles and show notes, and YouTube uploading, scheduling, tags and playlists.
They publish a turnaround, which I like, most clients can expect the full episode edit in three to four business days after uploading with clips and thumbnails typically following within another twenty four hours, and they publish their terms, no long-term lock-ins with most clients working month to month.
What they do not publish is price, or where the team sits, and that is where a comparison gets useful, because we publish $2,000 a month for up to 200 short-form videos and 30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 question becomes volume and economics rather than scope, right.
Their column is what Podcast Monkey publishes, ours is what we publish. Where they do not state something, the row says so instead of guessing.
| Pixel Samy Studio | Podcast Monkey | |
|---|---|---|
| Published pricing | $2,000 a month entry point | Not published on their site |
| Monthly volume published | Up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos | Not stated as a monthly number |
| Turnaround | Built around your publishing calendar, with a 24 hour turnaround on our podcast line | 3 to 4 business days for the episode edit, clips and thumbnails typically within another 24 hours |
| Clips | Included at volume, cut because they stand alone rather than to fill a quota | 15 to 60 second vertical clips optimised for YouTube Shorts |
| Thumbnails | Included, designed with the title as one piece by ClickTheory | Custom thumbnail design for each episode |
| Commitment | Monthly engagement | No long-term lock-ins, most clients month to month |
| Where the team sits | Close to 50 in-house editors in Dubai | Not stated on their site |
I am not going to manufacture differences that do not exist, so let me start with how much of this is the same.
Both of us take a recording and give back a finished long-form edit with colour and audio cleaned up, a set of vertical clips built for Shorts and Reels, a thumbnail for the episode, titles and descriptions written with search in mind, and the upload itself with tags and playlists handled. If you put the two deliverable lists side by side, most rows match.
That means the choice is not about scope, it is about three things, how much you publish, what it costs, and who is actually doing it.
On volume, they do not publish a monthly number and we publish a ceiling of 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos, which suits a different kind of client. On cost, they quote per engagement and we publish $2,000 as the entry point. And on people, we say close to 50 editors in-house in Dubai and their site does not say, which is not a criticism, most agencies do not, it just means you should ask.
The catch here is that when two services look identical on paper, the difference always shows up at volume and under pressure, so those are the questions worth asking both of us.
Podcast Monkey publish three to four business days for the episode edit and roughly another day for clips and thumbnails, and I think publishing that is genuinely good practice, because it lets a client build a calendar backwards from a date.
Our podcast line publishes a twenty four hour turnaround, and the honest context is that a number like that only holds when the pipeline is staffed for it, which is exactly why we carry close to fifty editors rather than a small core team plus freelancers.
But let me be very honest about turnaround as a buying criterion, because it is overrated in isolation. What actually breaks a publishing schedule is not the standard week, it is the week when three things land at once and everything needs recutting before a launch, and at that point the question is not the advertised turnaround, it is whether there is enough capacity in the building to absorb a spike without everything else slipping.
So when you ask either of us about turnaround, ask the second question too, which is what happens when you send four episodes in one week instead of one, because that answer tells you what you are really buying.
They do not publish pricing and we do, and I want to be careful not to turn that into a moral point, because plenty of excellent studios quote per engagement for perfectly sensible reasons.
What I would say is what it costs you as a buyer. If you are comparing four studios quietly with four tabs open, an agency that will not give you a number until the second call has just cost you an hour, and most founders will simply not spend it, which is why we publish $2,000 with what it covers.
The other reason is that a published price forces us to be honest about the model. Once the number is on the page, we cannot quietly charge a founder publishing ten pieces a month the same as one publishing two hundred, and the ceiling makes the economics legible in a way that hourly or per-project pricing never does.
So my suggestion, whichever way you go, is to ask any studio for the monthly cost and the monthly output in the same sentence, and if one of those two numbers is missing then you cannot compare anything, you are just comparing feelings about brands.
Both of us cut vertical clips, and clip counts are the easiest thing in this industry to inflate, so let me say what actually matters.
A clip works when it stands alone, which means it opens on something that makes sense without the episode around it, it lands a complete thought, and the first frame is not a logo or a wide shot of two people sitting down. That is a judgment call made by a human who watched the conversation, not a slicing rule applied at fixed intervals.
This is the bit where our own channels earn their keep. We run seven of them, each past a hundred thousand subscribers, and the thing that took us longest to learn is that a great ninety second moment usually dies because the first two seconds were wrong, and that lesson is now baked into how our editors choose and top-and-tail clips.
So when you are comparing studios, ask to see three clips from the same episode rather than a showreel, because a showreel shows you the best moment anybody ever handed them, and three clips from one ordinary recording shows you what your Tuesday will look like.
When the deliverable lists match this closely, I would decide on four things and none of them are on the pricing page.
First, volume. Count what you will genuinely publish in a busy month and ask both studios what that costs and whether it is inside their normal capacity. Second, people. Ask who edits your show in month six and whether they are employed by the studio. Third, packaging. Ask who writes the title and designs the thumbnail, and what they base it on, because that decides whether anybody clicks. Fourth, the bad week. Ask what happens when four episodes land together.
For what it is worth, Podcast Monkey answer the commitment question well already, no lock-ins and month to month, and if that is your main worry then they have removed it up front, which is worth something.
Our answer to all four is a published ceiling, an in-house team in Dubai, a sister studio that does nothing but packaging, and enough capacity that a spike is absorbed rather than queued. Whether that is worth $2,000 to you depends entirely on how much you publish, and if the honest answer is one episode a month, then the simpler arrangement is probably the right one.
The useful version of this page, because a comparison where the other studio never wins is a comparison nobody believes.
Go with Podcast Monkey if you run one show, you want a clear turnaround you can plan a publishing calendar around, and you like that they say plainly there is no lock-in, because for a single weekly show that is a clean, low-commitment arrangement and there is nothing wrong with it at all.
Their pre-show side is also broader than ours in places, since they list scheduling, show prep, equipment and directory submissions, and if you are launching a podcast from nothing rather than scaling one that exists, that hand-holding is worth having.
Come to us when one show is not the whole picture, when there are webinars, talks, interviews and founder recordings all piling up, and what you need is a studio that can absorb all of it at a known monthly cost.
The economics are the other reason. Our $2,000 covers a ceiling of 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos, so if you are producing four episodes a month and want every one of them fully clipped, captioned and packaged, your cost per asset keeps falling as you use the capacity, which is the whole point of the content flywheel we run.
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.
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.
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 choosing between two studios whose deliverable lists look identical, send me one ordinary episode and I will send back what a month of output from it looks like, which is a far better test than any page like this. So yeah. That's my way of saying it.