Replacing a sales-call funnel with a paywall users can navigate themselves.
- Role
- UX/UI Designer (contract)
- Duration
- 10 weeks · Sep–Nov 2023
- Team
- CEO + 1 Engineer
- Tools
Figma
Notion
ChatGPT
Why Fundr needed a redesign
Fundr needed to monetize without alienating users — but the product had no upgrade path.
Every plan change ran through a 1:1 sales call. Users waited days for a human to flip a switch. The pricing was confusing, the low tiers didn’t justify upgrading, and there was no self-service path. I had ten weeks to design one.
Three things standing in the way
Sales calls for every upgrade
Confusing pricing structure
Free tier too limited to sell upgrades
“I didn’t even know there were paid plans. I’ve been on the same tier since I signed up.”— User during discovery interviews
“Pricing affects the bottom line nearly 4x over acquisition. Monetization has a 12.7% impact on the bottom line compared to 3.32% from customer acquisition.”
This reframed the project from “UI cleanup” to a business-critical decision. Pricing surface was the lever — not polish.
The Upgrade Flow
Every path leads to checkout — here’s the full picture.
Before diving into individual surfaces, it’s worth seeing how the pieces connect. The upgrade flow has three entry points — a scrollable sales funnel, feature-specific popups, and situational upgrade prompts — all converging into a single checkout. Users can start from anywhere and finish in under a minute.
What this shows
How all three CTA paths converge into a single checkout
Why it matters
Multiple entry points, one consistent upgrade experience
The result
Users can enter from any surface and complete in under a minute
CTA Strategy
Three upgrade surfaces that don’t interrupt the workflow.
The problem
Users who wanted to upgrade hit a wall.
Users who wanted to upgrade hit a wall — a generic “Contact Sales” link and days of waiting.
What I did
- ▸Collapsible status menu — feature access at a glance, expanded by default
- ▸Static CTA buttons — accessible from every page so users never hunt for the upgrade path
- ▸Triggered popup cards — let users keep working without losing context
Research
Systems with combined CTA methods outperform single-method approaches — and the most effective pattern bridges the gap between the CTA and the conversion point with the right information at the right time.
What this shows
Three CTA types layered by user intent — glance, browse, and act
Why it matters
Each surface serves a different moment without overwhelming the interface
The result
Self-serve upgrades that don’t interrupt the user’s flow
The Core Mechanism
What users are upgrading for — SPVs, explained.
The problem
Fundr’s platform centers on Special Purpose Vehicles — the investment structure that lets investors pool capital into a single startup. Most users didn’t understand what an SPV was or how capital flowed through it. Upgrade prompts had no context — users couldn’t value what they couldn’t visualize.
What I did
- ▸Designed an infographic breaking down who’s involved, how capital moves, and what happens at each stage
- ▸Connected it to upgrade triggers — premium unlocks more SPV data, deeper analytics, and priority access
- ▸Placed after CTAs — users see the infographic right after an upgrade prompt, bridging curiosity to understanding
What this shows
The SPV structure — investors, capital flow, and the startup relationship
Why it matters
Users understand the core mechanism before they consider paying for premium access
The result
Upgrade prompts now carry context — users know exactly what they’re unlocking
Pricing Redesign
Confusing tiers, made deliberate.
The problem
A single pricing table that mixed investor and startup features — making both segments feel the product wasn’t built for them.
Fundr’s pricing page was a single table that mixed investor features with startup features — making both segments feel the product wasn’t built for them.
What I did
- ▸Two separate pricing paths — investors and startups on different pages, each with tailored features
- ▸Best-value option highlighted — users see which plan gives them the most without guessing
- ▸Transparent fees up-front — annual plan incentives, clear per-user pricing, no hidden costs
“Wait — I can actually see what each plan costs without guessing. That’s… clear.”— User testing the pricing page prototype
The Controversy
One pricing page or two?
The CEO wanted one unified pricing page — simplicity was a core value, and two paths risked surface complexity. I mapped both user journeys, showed where investor and startup needs diverged, and the data won. We shipped two pricing paths.
Tiered Dashboard
A free tier worth using. A premium tier worth paying for.
The problem
The free tier was a demo, not a product — so limited that users couldn’t evaluate whether Fundr was right for them.
The free tier was a demo, not a product — so limited that users couldn’t evaluate whether Fundr was right for them.
What I did
- ▸Basic tier — genuinely useful features with upgrade triggers at natural ceilings
- ▸Premium tier — advanced graphs, expanded data, and priority support that extends how you work in the free tier
- ▸The trigger — users hit a natural ceiling in the free tier and decide for themselves whether the upgrade is worth it
Why this approach
SaaS users convert when they experience value firsthand. A free tier worth using builds trust. A premium tier worth paying for converts without pressure.
Basic tier
Premium tier
What this shows
Side-by-side comparison of free vs paid dashboard experience
Why it matters
Users see exactly what they gain — not just what they’re missing
Before → After
Three shifts that changed the upgrade experience.
Impact
Fewer sales calls. More upgrades. A pricing surface that does its own selling.
- 01
20% increase in upgrade rates through improved financial dashboard UI
- 02
~50% reduction in negative feedback by redesigning navigation for embedded experiences
- 03
~50% decrease in required sales calls via self-serve monetization design
- 04
Expected 5% client-base growth within 6 months of launch
“I just upgraded myself. It took like 20 seconds. Last time I had to email support and wait three days.”— Beta user, first week after launch
What I’d Do Differently
Hindsight and the next version.
- 01
Push for analytics instrumentation before shipping. We had to estimate upgrade rate impact instead of measuring it directly, which made iteration harder and the second cycle slower than it needed to be.
- 02
Run a larger A/B test on the 3-CTA hierarchy. The collapsible menu and popup cards tested well individually, but a cleaner 2-variant test would have given stronger signal on which surface drives the most conversions.
- 03
Involve engineering earlier in the pricing IA. Separating investor and startup billing had back-end implications we didn’t surface until implementation, which compressed the engineering timeline.
Want a walkthrough?
I’ll walk you through the pricing redesign, the CTA tests, and the calls we cut.
More case studies