Price a defined engagement.
An audit, a metadata project and ongoing research with creative production are different purchases. Asking for one universal ASO price hides the work being compared. Start by naming the decision, deliverables and audience.
This guide does not invent a market rate or quote Gabriel’s fees. Use the pricing page for his scoping approach and request a proposal based on your actual app.
Count scope dimensions, not just pages.
The work can expand across stores, markets, locales and assets. Some research can be reused; some requires separate local review. A multiplication of deliverable counts is not a reliable fee formula.
The illustrative chart shows review-item counts only. It explains why scope matters without pretending that each item has equal effort or that fees increase in a fixed linear way.
Separate advice from production.
Keyword research, recommendations, design, translation, implementation and publishing are distinct responsibilities. A proposal may include some and exclude others. Make those boundaries visible before comparing totals.
Use proposal review to check what the fee buys. Do not compare a strategy brief with a finished multilingual asset bundle as though the outputs were equivalent.
Include your own implementation burden.
Record internal time needed for product answers, approvals, design and release coordination. External fees are only one component of the work required. A cheap-looking proposal can still leave an important capability gap.
Compare delivery ownership and identify dependencies. Avoid using speculative revenue forecasts to justify a fee as though the outcome were guaranteed.
Request a comparable proposal.
Give providers the same app links, priority markets, objective and responsibilities. Ask for deliverables, exclusions, revision terms and a process for agreeing additional work.
Use the brief builder. If the issue is a bounded diagnosis, review audit scope before buying a broader engagement.
