Writing "down 73%" would be a lie
In autumn 2025 the email delivery service Postmark repriced.
Pro went from $60.50 a month to $16.50. Platform went from $138.00 to $18.00. Read the sticker alone and that is a 73% and an 87% cut.
The volume included in those figures changed at the same time. Pro went from 50,000 messages to 10,000. Platform went from 125,000 to 10,000.
Divide it out per 1,000 messages and the price went up.
Doing the division
| Plan | 2025-08-01 | 2025-09-12 | Per 1,000 messages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic | $15.00 / 10,000 | $15.00 / 10,000 | $1.50 → $1.50 |
| Pro | $60.50 / 50,000 | $16.50 / 10,000 | $1.21 → $1.65 (+36%) |
| Platform | $138.00 / 125,000 | $18.00 / 10,000 | $1.104 → $1.80 (+63%) |
Basic held completely — same price, same volume.
The two upper plans are where it moved, and in both the sticker fell sharply while the unit price rose.
The volume discount is gone
Before the change, the three plans got cheaper per message as you went up: $1.50, $1.21, $1.104. Buy more, pay less each. The usual shape.
After it, all three start at 10,000 messages and the unit price goes $1.50, $1.65, $1.80 — more expensive as you go up.
The order reversed. Volume is no longer what separates the tiers, so the upper plans are now paid for something other than throughput. Whatever that something is, it is no longer "send more, pay less".
How to report a change like this
Headlining "Postmark cuts prices sharply" from the sticker difference would be an accurate quotation and a false story.
Headlining "an effective price rise" would be wrong too, for anyone who only needs 10,000 messages. To them, Pro simply went from $60.50 to $16.50, and that is the whole of it.
The direction of this change reverses depending on the size of the customer. Forcing one headline onto it guarantees a lie in one direction or the other.
What could not be established
The overage rates for the new plans could not be read. The old page listed "Extra emails @ $1.80 / 1,000" for Basic, and the new Basic carries the same line, but the Pro and Platform overage rates are not recoverable from the archived pages.
So this article cannot say what someone previously sending 50,000 messages on Pro now pays. The included volume fell to a fifth, so overage is certain; the rate for it is not known.
That figure would answer the question for the people who most want it answered. Publishing a guess in its place would do more harm than leaving it out.
Without a common unit, a price rise is invisible
What a pricing page lists is a monthly figure. What you are actually buying is messages.
When the denominator moves, comparing numerators means nothing. $60.50 and $16.50 look like comparable numbers, and one of them is the price of 50,000 messages while the other is the price of 10,000.
Whether the price fell is not knowable until you divide.
Sources
Every figure was read from Postmark's own pricing page as saved by the Internet Archive — the monthly price of each plan and its "Starting at N emails/month" line, directly.
- Pricing page, 1 August 2025 (Pro $60.50 / 50,000)
- Pricing page, 12 September 2025 (Pro $16.50 / 10,000)
- Postmark pricing
The change can only be placed between those two snapshots.
Only the vendor's own published pricing and plan terms are used. No user reviews or forum posts.