Sandwich publish that $250K is a good starting point. We publish $2,000 a month. Those numbers are not competing, and the interesting question is what each one is actually for.
Everything below about Sandwich Video comes from their own public pages, read on 24 September 2026. Check it yourself
Sandwich are the only company on any of these pages who answer the price question with a joke and then a real number, and I have a lot of time for that.
On their site, read on 24 September 2026, their FAQ says that it costs real money, that typically $250K is a good starting point though they will also work with a lot more, and that for a startup with an idea they absolutely have to get behind, they can get creative with equity. They describe themselves as the de facto creative studio for Silicon Valley, they work mostly in live action with animation when the story calls for it, they publish a Los Angeles address and named leadership, and they are refreshingly blunt about fit, saying their favourite clients take risks, communicate well, trust their collaborators, and also have money.
One caveat on their own figures. Their FAQ describes nine years and around 700 videos for 300 clients while their about page says since 2009, so that copy is clearly some years old and the volume numbers are almost certainly understated now.
We publish $2,000 a month for up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos, produced by close to 50 editors in-house in Dubai. Their starting point is roughly ten years of our entry price, which tells you immediately that these are different purchases rather than competing quotes.
Their column is what Sandwich Video publishes, ours is what we publish. Where they do not state something, the row says so instead of guessing.
| Pixel Samy Studio | Sandwich Video | |
|---|---|---|
| Published pricing | $2,000 a month entry point | Typically $250K is a good starting point, and they will work with a lot more |
| What you get for it | Up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos a month | A produced film, made from scratch with crew, cast and direction |
| Do they shoot | No, we work from footage that already exists | Yes, mostly live action, with animation when the story calls for it |
| Equity arrangements | No, we charge a monthly fee | Possible for startups with an idea they want to back |
| Who they say they are for | Founders with recordings and a publishing habit | Clients who take risks, communicate well, trust collaborators, and have money |
| Where the team sits | Close to 50 in-house editors in Dubai | Published as Los Angeles, California, with named leadership |
Most agencies in the premium end of this industry will not say a number, and the reason is usually that they want to size the quote to the client rather than to the work.
Sandwich put a floor in their FAQ, and the effect is that a founder with sixty thousand dollars reads one paragraph and goes elsewhere in ninety seconds instead of spending three weeks in a process that was never going to end in a yes.
We publish for the same reason at the other end of the market. $2,000 a month, with what it covers, so that somebody who needs two videos a quarter can see immediately that we are the wrong shape for them.
The pattern I would take from both is worth more than either number. An agency that tells you early who they are not for is usually confident about who they are for, and that confidence is what you are actually hiring. Vagueness about price is often vagueness about product.
Let me put the arithmetic in the open, because it is stark and it makes the distinction obvious.
Their starting point of $250K, spent with us at the published entry price, would be more than ten years of monthly production. Ten years, at up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form pieces a month.
That comparison sounds devastating and it is completely misleading, which is exactly why I want to make it and then take it apart.
A launch film is not competing with volume. It does a job volume cannot do, which is to make a market understand what something is, in one piece, with enough craft that people send it to each other. Almost nothing we produce will ever do that, because a clip cut from a podcast is a different instrument.
And our volume does a job the film cannot do, which is to be there every day for a year so that when somebody finally looks you up, there is a body of work rather than one beautiful artefact and silence.
The catch here is that the two budgets usually come from the same pocket, so the honest question is which failure you can least afford. Nobody understanding what you do, or nobody remembering you exist.
There is a version of this comparison where the volume studio pretends quality is the same at both ends, and I am not going to make that argument.
A production like theirs involves writing, casting, direction, a shoot day with a crew, and post that can take weeks on a single cut. The quality ceiling there is higher than anything achievable at volume, and it should be, because the resources per second of finished video are in a different universe.
What volume production optimises instead is a different kind of quality, which is consistency under repetition. Two hundred pieces a month where the captions are right, the first two seconds make sense, the pacing matches how you actually speak and nothing embarrassing goes out. That is genuinely hard, just hard in a boring way that nobody makes showreels about.
So the honest framing is that they are buying you the best possible version of one thing and we are buying you a reliable version of many things. If a founder tells me they want cinema quality on two hundred pieces a month, I tell them that is not a thing, at any price, and anybody promising it is either redefining cinema or redefining two hundred.
This is the practical situation most companies are actually in, so here is what I would do.
If the product is genuinely hard to explain and that is costing you deals, spend on clarity first, even if it means a smaller version of a film rather than the full production. Understanding is a prerequisite, and content volume around a product nobody understands just distributes the confusion faster.
If people understand you fine but nobody thinks of you, spend on frequency, because that is a habit problem and a monthly engine solves it while a one-off film will not.
And if you have the budget for a premium film, protect a slice of it for the year afterwards. The most common waste I see is a company spending everything on a beautiful launch asset, publishing it once, and then going quiet, which means the asset carries the entire year alone. Even a modest continuous engine underneath it makes that film work harder for longer, because there is somewhere for the attention to land.
The useful version of this page, because a comparison where the other studio never wins is a comparison nobody believes.
Go with Sandwich when you have one thing to say and it has to be said beautifully, which usually means a launch film, a category defining product video, or the piece that sits at the top of a homepage for the next three years and does more work than anything else you make.
That is a craft purchase, not a volume purchase, and at that level you are buying direction, casting, writing and the judgment of people who have made this exact kind of film many times. If the budget is there and the moment is genuinely that important, spending it on one excellent film rather than spreading it across a year of content is often the right call.
Come to us for everything that happens in between, which is most of the year.
One exceptional film does not fill a YouTube channel, a LinkedIn feed or a podcast schedule, and it cannot, because that is not what it is for. Continuous presence is a different purchase measured in published pieces a month, and our $2,000 covers up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form, which is set out on our short-form video editing page.
Superside publish a $15,000 monthly minimum on an annual term for their whole creative offering. We publish $2,000 a month for a video output ceiling. These are not competing products, and I would rather explain that than pretend otherwise.
Vidico publish monthly plans starting at $5,000 a month with rollover credits, across video, design and motion. We publish $2,000 a month for up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos from footage you already have.
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.
Tasty Edits publish a clear price for every single video. We publish a monthly ceiling. The maths flips somewhere around fifteen pieces a month, and here is exactly where.
If you have just spent a large budget on one excellent film, the cheapest thing you can do next is make sure something runs underneath it all year. So yeah. That's my way of saying it.