How much does it cost to remove one link?
It is priced per item, and the price follows the difficulty rather than a rate card. A review or a post breaching a platform's published policy sits at the low end. A page on an established site with no policy breach and no legal basis sits at the high end, and some items are quoted as not worth attempting at all.
Why is there no rate card?
Because the work is not the same work twice. Two items that look identical in a search result can be a one-form policy complaint and a six-month legal argument.
What decides it is where the material sits and what route it opens. A published rate would have to price the hardest case, which would overcharge everyone whose problem is simple, or the easiest, which would mean declining everything else once it was quoted.
What makes one item cheap and another expensive?
Four things, roughly in order of weight.
Whether a route exists at all. An item breaching a published policy is argued on evidence. An item with no policy breach and no legal basis has to be displaced instead, which is a different service at a different price.
Who is on the other side. A small site with a contact form behaves differently from an established publisher with a legal desk. Jurisdiction, language and the number of copies all compound.
Whether it is one item or a pattern. A single post is a task. Forty copies seeded across broker sites is a programme, and pricing each copy separately would be dishonest arithmetic.
What does the market actually charge?
Very little of it is published, which is itself worth knowing. Among firms that do disclose anything, one Dubai firm lists a minimum project size of around $1,000 on a public directory, while operators in the same market have described monthly retainers in the $20,000 to $30,000 range in public interviews.
That spread is not a market disagreeing about price. It is different services under one label: a single policy complaint and a standing programme across every surface are both sold as "reputation management".
The useful question is therefore not what it costs but what is being bought — a named item removed, or a month of effort.
What should never be charged for?
An attempt. Removal depends on third parties, so taking the fee upfront for an outcome nobody controls puts the risk on the side of the table that is already carrying the damage.
Mosaek prices removals per item and charges only once the item is gone. Nobody pays for an attempt, a report, or an intention. That is also the clearest line between this work and the industry's worst actors, and it keeps the incentive honest.
How is the rest of it priced?
Differently, because it is different work. Monitoring and authority programmes are retained monthly against the number of surfaces and named individuals covered. Fractional engagements are priced as a seat rather than a project.
Suppression in particular cannot be priced per item, because there is no item. It is a standing programme, and a programme that stops gives the positions back.
What should a quote contain?
| It should say | Because |
|---|---|
| The specific URL or item | A quote for "the problem" is not a quote |
| The route intended for it | Policy, data protection, copyright or court — or none |
| A price for that item | Not a blended monthly figure |
| When it becomes payable | On removal, not on filing |
| What happens if it fails | You should pay nothing for that item |
| What happens if it returns | Monitoring and refiling, and for how long |
| Which items are not worth trying | An honest list has some. A list with none is a sales document |
If a quote does not contain the last line, ask for it. Every real caseload has items that should be left alone, and a firm unwilling to name them is selling effort rather than outcomes.