Lead Generation
Seamless.AI
Rest of world Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Seamless Contacts, Inc. · seamless.ai
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Seamless.AI, from Seamless Contacts, Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, is a lead generation platform centred on contact search and outreach. Its strongest area is CRM sync and export, scoring 5-6: native Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics integrations, field mapping, real-time webhook enrichment, a nightly org-companies sync, and a documented API where reading already-researched org contacts consumes no credits. Its weakest is visitor identification at 1-2 — the Buyer Intent add-on is sold as finding prospects 'ready to buy', but we found no public information on what it identifies, how tracking works, or its consent position. Judges split at 2-3 on data provenance: higher scores credited the Privacy Request Center and the disclosed collection through customer integrations, lower ones weighed the 'irrevocable, perpetual' licence over submitted data 'for any purpose whatsoever' and found no explanation behind the GDPR badge. Sovereignty scores are level at 3 — a US entity, storage 'in the United States or in any other country', standard contractual clauses only 'where required to by its customers'. Only the Free tier, 1 User and 50 Credits, has public numbers.
Speaks for it
- Native Salesforce, HubSpot and Microsoft Dynamics integrations with field mapping for email, phone, title and company
- Real-time webhook enrichment and a documented API with token authentication
- Reading already-researched org contacts consumes no credits
- An invalid email is automatically refunded as a credit
- Listed individuals get a Privacy Request Center with access, correction, objection and deletion routes
Held against it
- Submitted data from connected networking, CRM, email and social accounts is licensed to the vendor 'for any purpose whatsoever' under an 'irrevocable, perpetual' licence
- On termination buyers must 'immediately securely destroy any and all Seamless.AI Content and Seamless.AI Data', which remains the vendor's property
- We found no public information on where the contact records come from or the legal basis for processing them
- We found no public information on suppression lists, do-not-contact handling or do-not-call register checks
- We found no public information on what the Buyer Intent add-on identifies or how its tracking works
Best for
- You run Salesforce, HubSpot or Dynamics and want researched contacts upserted into the CRM with field mapping
- You want to test solo with the Free plan's 1 User and 50 Credits before any sales conversation
- Your team wants emailing, calling and task management in one place, since Connect is included on all plans
- You research contacts in bulk via the API and sync org data to a warehouse without per-read credit costs
Avoid if
- You plan to buy primarily for the Buyer Intent add-on
- You cannot accept an irrevocable, perpetual licence over data from your connected networking, CRM and email accounts
- Your retention rules require keeping contact records after cancelling a vendor
- Your procurement requires EU data residency rather than storage 'in the United States or in any other country'
The scores
Coverage, accuracy & freshness
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How much of the target market the database actually covers — judged on DACH and EU coverage as much as North American — and what the vendor documents about verification and refresh, because accuracy claims cannot be checked from outside.
0 — No stated coverage, no refresh cadence, no verification method; accuracy asserted as a percentage with nothing behind it.
3 — Headline record counts for the whole database, thin or unstated European coverage, and no description of how often records are re-verified.
5 — Coverage stated per country or region including DACH, email verification described, a stated refresh cadence, and firmographics beyond name and domain.
8 — Coverage broken down by country, industry and data type (email, direct dial, mobile), verification method and refresh cadence documented, company data drawn from official registers where available, and a bounce or credit-back guarantee with stated terms.
10 — The vendor is accountable for its data: per-country coverage and accuracy methodology published, every field carrying a last-verified date visible to the user, register-sourced company data, and credit-back terms that make inaccuracy the vendor's cost rather than the buyer's.
The SDR Team Lead
The homepage counts 1.6 billion-plus verified business emails and 448 million-plus phone numbers, but we found no public information on coverage by country — DACH included — on how records are verified, or on a refresh cadence beyond 'updated continuously'. The automatic credit refund on invalid emails is real accountability for bounces, which is what I measure my database by; beyond that, nothing documents accuracy or where company data comes from. 1 2
The RevOps Manager
The pages lead with headline counts — 1.6B+ verified emails and 448M+ phone numbers plus 100+ data points per profile "updated continuously" — but we found no public information on per-country coverage for DACH or Europe, no verification method and no refresh cadence. The automatic refund of credits for invalid emails is the one accountability signal, and on its own it does not change the picture. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Headline counts are published — '1.6B+ verified business emails and 448M+ phone numbers', '100+ live data points per profile, updated continuously' — and an invalid email is refunded automatically with stated terms. But we found no public information on coverage by country or region, no DACH or European breakdown, no method behind the 'verified' label and no re-verification cadence, so accuracy rests on assertion plus the refund. 1 2
The ABM Marketer
Scale is headline-only: 1.6 billion verified emails and 448 million phone numbers, with no country or industry breakdowns and I found no public information on DACH or broader European coverage beyond "go to market anywhere in the world". Verification is asserted in the adjective and refresh is "updated continuously" with no method or cadence; the automatic credit refund on invalid emails is the one piece of vendor accountability that lifts this above the baseline. 1
The DACH Sales Director
The headline figures are database-wide — 1.6B+ verified business emails and 448M+ phone numbers — with no country breakdown, and we found no public information on coverage for Germany, Austria or Switzerland, on the verification method, or on a refresh cadence beyond 'updated continuously'. The automatic refund of credits for an invalid email is the one term that puts inaccuracy on the vendor's account, which lifts this just above the base mark. 1
The Skeptic
The homepage sells "1.6B+ verified business emails and 448M+ phone numbers" and "100+ live data points per profile, updated continuously", but we found no public information on DACH or EU coverage, on how records are verified, or on any refresh cadence — "updated continuously" is a tagline, not a schedule. The one concrete accountability term is the automatic credit refund for invalid emails, which is more than most homepages commit to. 1 2
Data sources & lawful basis
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the personal data in the database comes from and on what legal basis it is processed — as evidenced on the vendor's own pages. Covers Art. 6(1)(f) legitimate interest, the Art. 14 notice to the people in the database, and whether they can find, object to and remove their record.
0 — No statement of where contact data comes from or on what legal basis; "GDPR-compliant" asserted without explanation, and no way for a listed person to object.
3 — Sources described in general terms ("public sources", "partners"), legitimate interest named without any balancing, and an opt-out request form as the only route for data subjects.
5 — Source categories named (registers, company websites, contributory networks, licensed partners), legitimate interest stated as the basis for EU records, a dedicated privacy notice for the people in the database, and a self-service opt-out or removal process.
8 — The above plus an Art. 14 notification practice described (people informed when added), contributory or browser-extension collection disclosed as such, a legitimate-interest assessment summarised publicly, and EU records handled differently from US records where the law differs.
10 — Provenance is traceable per record: the source and collection date available for each contact, Art. 14 notices sent and documented, the balancing test published, objections honoured across the whole dataset and suppressed permanently, and no data sourced by scraping behind logins or from contributors' address books without their contacts' knowledge.
The SDR Team Lead
The GDPR badge on the homepage is an assertion with no explanation behind it, and we found no public statement of where the contact records come from or on what legal basis they are processed. People in the database do get a Privacy Request Center with access, correction, objection and deletion routes plus named EU and UK representatives, which is more than nothing. The terms disclose that integrations collect data from customers' professional networking, CRM and email accounts under a licence to 'sell, distribute' it 'for any purpose whatsoever' — contributory collection disclosed, but with sweeping rights attached and no notice to the people collected. 1 3 4
The RevOps Manager
"GDPR Compliant — let us handle compliance with local laws" is asserted with nothing behind it, and we found no public information on where the database records come from or on what legal basis they are processed. The only collection disclosure is an irrevocable, sublicensable license over data drawn from customers' email, CRM and social accounts. A Privacy Request Center gives listed people a route to access, correct or delete, but the pages also state the directory itself is not removed. 1 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
The homepage asserts 'GDPR Compliant … let us handle compliance with local laws' with nothing behind it, and we found no public information on where the contact records come from, the legal basis for processing them, an Article 14 notice, or a balancing test. There is a Privacy Request Center with access, correction, objection and deletion rights plus an appeal email, and the terms say the vendor may ask customers to delete the data of individuals who have objected — but the same policy states company information is not removed from the directory, and the terms take an irrevocable, perpetual, sublicensable licence to exploit data collected from customers' connected networking, CRM, email and social accounts. 1 3 4
The ABM Marketer
GDPR compliance is sold as a badge — "let us handle compliance with local laws" — with no description of where the contact records come from or the legal basis for processing them. People in the database do get a self-service Privacy Request Center with access, correction and objection rights, and the terms disclose collection from customers' connected networking, email and social accounts under an irrevocable, perpetual, sublicensable license. I found no public information on informing individuals when added, a published balancing test, or different handling of EU versus US records. 1 3 4
The DACH Sales Director
GDPR compliance is a badge — 'let us handle compliance with local laws' — and we found no public information on where the contact records come from, on what legal basis they sit, or on any balancing test. The one sourcing disclosure is that integrations feed the vendor data from users' networking, CRM, email and social accounts under an irrevocable licence to sell and distribute it, while listed people at least have a Privacy Request Center route to access, correct, object or delete. 1 3 4
The Skeptic
"GDPR Compliant" and "let us handle compliance with local laws" are asserted with no explanation, and we found no public information on where the contact records come from, on a legitimate-interest basis for EU records, or on any practice of informing the people listed in the database. Listed people get a Privacy Request Center, and the terms disclose collection from users' connected professional networking, email and social accounts under an "irrevocable, perpetual" and sublicensable license to exploit that data "for any purpose whatsoever". 1 3 4
Visitor identification & intent signals
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Identifying companies behind website visits and surfacing buying intent — scored on what is identified (company or person), how the tracking works, and whether the vendor states that its script needs consent under §25 TDDDG and how it behaves without it.
0 — No visitor identification or intent data, or person-level identification of EU visitors with no statement of legal basis.
3 — Reverse-IP company identification with a cookie-setting script, no statement about consent, and match rates claimed without method.
5 — Company-level identification with filters, visit history per company, a stated position that the script requires consent where it sets cookies, and a consent-mode or cookieless option.
8 — Company-level only for EU traffic by design, cookieless operation documented, integration with common consent management platforms, intent topics or page-level signals with the source of third-party intent data named, and alerts routed to owners.
10 — Identification that survives a DPO review: no personal data of visitors stored, the TDDDG and GDPR position published and specific, third-party intent data sourced from a named co-op or panel with its consent basis stated, and scoring on intent that the user can trace back to the underlying visits.
The SDR Team Lead
A Buyer Intent add-on is named with the pitch 'prospects who are ready to buy with credit card in hand', but the captured pages say nothing about what is identified, how the tracking works, or any consent or cookieless position. We found no public information on website visitor identification, third-party intent sources, or alert routing, so I cannot tell my team what they would actually be buying or whether it survives a DPO conversation. 1 2
The RevOps Manager
Buyer Intent is sold as an add-on to "find all the prospects who are ready to buy", but we found no public information on what is identified, how the tracking works, or any consent position for a script that sets cookies. An intent product with no method and no legal statement is not something I could put in front of a DPO. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Buyer Intent is sold as an add-on to 'find all the prospects who are ready to buy', but we found no public information on how the tracking works, whether a script sets cookies, the vendor's position on consent under §25 TDDDG, or any cookieless or consent-mode option. The only tracking described in the captured policies is Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager on the vendor's own website. 2 3
The ABM Marketer
Buyer Intent is marketed as an add-on — "find all the prospects who are ready to buy with credit card in hand" — but I found no public information on whether it identifies companies visiting my site, how any tracking script works, or its consent position for German and EU traffic. I also found no public information on a named third-party intent source or on alerts routed to the account owner while the signal is warm, which is exactly what I need to work a 300-account list. 1 2
The DACH Sales Director
Buyer Intent is sold as an add-on — 'all the prospects who are ready to buy with credit card in hand' — and that claim is all there is: we found no public information on what is identified, how the tracking works, or any statement that a script needs consent under the TDDDG. Nor is there public information on a consent-mode or cookieless option, so I could not put this in front of a German data protection officer. 2
Prospecting workflow & outreach rules
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Search, list building and outreach — and whether the product helps the buyer stay within UWG §7 and the GDPR once the list exists, rather than leaving the legal risk entirely with the customer.
0 — A search box and an export button; nothing on the pages about what the buyer may lawfully do with the contacts.
3 — Filters on firmographics and job title, saved lists, and a terms clause making the customer solely responsible for compliance.
5 — Advanced filters including technographics and triggers, company-level lists and alerts, a global suppression or do-not-contact list, and guidance on cold outreach rules in the main EU markets.
8 — The above plus country-aware handling (for example flagging German contacts where cold calls and emails require consent), phone numbers checked against national do-not-call registers where they exist, and opt-outs from outreach synced back to the database.
10 — Compliance is part of the workflow: outreach channels restricted or flagged per country and contact type by default, suppression shared across the whole account and every export, the Art. 14 notice supported at first contact, and a documented record of how each contact entered the buyer's pipeline.
The SDR Team Lead
Prospecting and outreach exist — Prospector, a Job Changes Filter, and Connect for emailing, calling and tasks — but we found no public information on suppression or do-not-contact lists, checks against do-not-call registers, or country-aware handling of German contacts where cold calls and emails need consent. The terms restrict use to B2B development and prohibit FCRA purposes, which is something; the homepage otherwise offers 'let us handle compliance with local laws' as a badge, and the risk sits with my SDRs. 1 2 4
The RevOps Manager
Search with a job-changes filter and in-product emailing and calling are on the pricing page, and the terms restrict use to B2B purposes and bar FCRA-regulated uses — but we found no public information on a suppression or do-not-contact list, do-not-call register checking, or country-aware flags for markets like Germany. The vendor "may request" that I delete contacts who have asked for deletion, which leaves the outreach risk sitting on my side of the table. 2 4
The Data Protection Officer
Search, export and outreach are all present — Prospector with 'B2B cell phones, email addresses and direct dials', Connect for emailing, calling and tasks — with terms restricting use to B2B purposes, a right to monitor the customer's compliance, and a clause under which the vendor may request deletion of an objecting individual's data. We found no public information on a suppression or do-not-contact list, country-aware flags for German contacts, checks against national do-not-call registers, or guidance on cold outreach rules in EU markets. 2 4
The ABM Marketer
Search and outreach live in one product — Connect handles emailing, calling and tasks inside the app — and the terms restrict use to B2B development opportunities and let the vendor request deletion when an individual objects. I found no public information on technographic filters, saved lists, a global suppression or do-not-contact list, or guidance on cold-call and cold-email consent rules in Germany and the other EU markets, so the UWG and GDPR risk on every outreach sits with me. 2 4
The DACH Sales Director
Connect puts emailing, calling and task management on every plan, while the terms push the legal work onto the customer: B2B purposes only, FCRA-regulated uses barred, and the vendor reserving the right to monitor and audit my use. We found no public information on suppression or do-not-contact lists, on country-aware consent flags — nothing on how a cold call or email into Germany under UWG §7 would be treated — and the single relay back is that the vendor may request deletion of an individual who has asked for it. 2 4
The Skeptic
The terms restrict what a buyer may do — B2B use only, FCRA purposes prohibited, CRM integrations exposing data to unauthorized users banned — but we found no public information on a do-not-contact or suppression list, do-not-call register checks, or any guidance on cold-outreach rules in EU markets. Every compliance mechanism on the pages protects the vendor's data; the legal risk of using it sits with the customer. 4 2
CRM sync, enrichment & export
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting the data into the systems where sales works — CRM sync, enrichment of existing records, API — and what happens to exported data, and to the buyer's access to it, when the subscription ends.
0 — Manual CSV export only; no CRM integration and no API.
3 — A one-way push to one CRM, CSV export, and no statement on whether exported data may be kept after cancellation.
5 — Native sync with the major CRMs including field mapping and deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, and a documented API with stated limits.
8 — Bidirectional sync with scheduled re-enrichment, update and deletion propagated when a record changes or a person objects, webhook or API access with credit costs per call published, and data retention rights after cancellation stated plainly.
10 — The vendor treats the buyer's CRM as the system of record: objections and corrections propagated into synced records automatically, full change history per field, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, and exit terms that say exactly which data the customer may keep and for how long.
The SDR Team Lead
This is the strongest area: native Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics with field mapping, a documented API with token authentication and a research-to-CRM upsert flow, real-time webhook enrichment, and a nightly org-companies sync whose reads consume no credits. On exit the terms require immediate secure destruction of all vendor data, so retention after cancellation is stated plainly — as an obligation rather than a right. We found no public information on bidirectional sync, per-call credit costs, or change history per field. 1 5 6 4
The RevOps Manager
This is the best-documented part of the product: native Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics, field mapping for email, phone, title and company, an upsert-based sync flow, nightly company syncs, real-time webhook enrichment and an API where reading already-researched contacts consumes no credits. What holds it back is the exit: the data is vendor property, and on termination I must immediately and securely destroy every record — the opposite of terms that say what my company may keep — and we found no public information on bidirectional sync or objections propagating into my CRM. 1 4 5 6
The Data Protection Officer
Native connections to Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics, field mapping into the CRM object, real-time webhook enrichment, an org-contacts endpoint for nightly sync that consumes no credits, and a documented API with token authentication. Exit terms are stated plainly but one-sided: on termination the customer must immediately destroy all vendor data, and the vendor retains all right, title and interest in it. We found no public information on deduplication, automatic propagation of corrections and objections into synced records, or per-call credit costs. 4 5 6
The ABM Marketer
The plumbing is real: native integrations with Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics, field mapping, webhook enrichment, and an org-companies endpoint for nightly sync of enriched records that costs no credits to read. I found no public information on deduplication, bidirectional sync, or automatic propagation when a person objects to their record, and the terms instead require immediate destruction of all Seamless data on termination rather than stating what I may keep and for how long. 1 4 5 6
The DACH Sales Director
Native Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics integrations, field mapping, CRM cleaning, and a documented API with webhooks, a nightly company sync and org-contact exports that consume no credits — that earns the middle ground. Exit terms are plain but stark: on termination I must immediately and securely destroy all Seamless data, so exported records last exactly as long as the contract; we found no public information on deduplication or on objections propagating into synced records. 4 5 6
The Skeptic
Native Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics integrations with field mapping, webhook enrichment, a nightly org-companies sync and a documented API with token auth — reading already-researched org contacts consumes no credits — show real plumbing, though we found no public information on deduplication, API limits, or propagation of updates and objections into synced records. Exit terms are stated bluntly: on termination buyers must "immediately securely destroy any and all Seamless.AI Content and Seamless.AI Data". 5 6 1 4
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where a database of EU residents' personal data is held, who the contracting entity and controller are, and which subprocessors see it. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted heavily here, because the product itself is personal data about people who never chose the vendor.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and EU residents' contact data processed outside the EU with no stated transfer basis.
3 — Non-EU contracting entity with an EU representative under Art. 27, or EU hosting offered while enrichment, support or AI processing stay non-EU.
5 — EU contracting entity and EU hosting as standard, but parts of the chain — data partners, enrichment sources, tracking infrastructure — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU contracting entity and controller, EU hosting on named infrastructure, subprocessor and data-partner list published, and any non-EU transfer named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, controller, hosting, data partners and every subprocessor European, certification published, and a DPA covering both the customer's data and the database records the customer exports.
The SDR Team Lead
The contracting entity is Seamless Contacts, Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, hosting is stated as the United States or any other country where the vendor or its service providers do business, and EU people's contact data therefore leaves the EU under standard contractual clauses invoked 'where required to by its customers'. IT Governance Europe and GRCI Law are named as EU and UK representatives, and subprocessors appear only as categories plus Google for web analytics — a named list we did not find. That is the US-entity-with-an-EU-representative picture, not a sovereign one. 3 4
The RevOps Manager
The contracting entity is Seamless Contacts, Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, the privacy policy says personal data may be stored and used in the United States or in any other country, and an EU representative has been appointed — the classic non-EU setup. Standard contractual clauses are mentioned only "where required to by its customers", and we found no public information on an EU hosting option, a named subprocessor list beyond generic categories and Google Analytics, or a DPA covering exported database records. 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity and self-declared controller is Seamless Contacts, Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, and the privacy policy says personal data may be stored in the United States or in any other country where the vendor or its service providers do business. An EU representative (IT Governance Europe Limited) and a UK representative are appointed and standard contractual clauses are offered 'where required' by customers, which is the Article 27 pattern; subprocessors appear only as categories plus Google LLC for web analytics, and we found no published subprocessor or data-partner list for the contact database itself. 3 4
The ABM Marketer
The contracting entity is Seamless Contacts Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, with personal data stored in the United States or wherever its service providers operate — and an EU representative (IT Governance Europe Limited) is appointed, with standard contractual clauses named as the transfer mechanism. That is precisely the pattern of a non-EU vendor with Article 27 representation; subprocessor disclosure is by category, with Google Analytics the one named provider. 3 4
The DACH Sales Director
The contracting entity and controller is an Ohio company, an EU representative has been appointed, and hosting sits in the United States 'or in any other country' where the vendor or its service providers do business. Transfers rest on standard contractual clauses 'where required to by its customers', and subprocessors appear as categories rather than a published list — Google LLC shows up for web analytics only. A database of EU professionals processed on US terms is not something I can sign off in the Mittelstand. 3 4
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Seamless Contacts Inc. of Dublin, Ohio, with EU and UK representatives appointed — the standard non-EU arrangement — and personal data "may store, access, or use" (sic) in "the United States or in any other country" where the vendor or its service providers operate. Standard contractual clauses appear only "where required to by its customers", and beyond Google for website analytics we found only service-provider categories, with no named subprocessor or data-partner list. 3 4
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone — including credits per email, phone number and mobile, credit expiry, seat pricing, visitor-identification tiers and the API — in a category where the unit of billing is often invented by the vendor.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A monthly headline exists, but what a credit buys, whether credits expire, or the cost of an additional seat is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with credit allowances given, but at least one commonly needed piece (mobile numbers, extra seats, API access, CRM sync) is unpriced or behind a sales call.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with credits per data type, credit expiry and rollover, per-seat costs, overage rates, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given number of seats, exported contacts by data type, identified companies and API calls, with every credit cost and the refund rule for inaccurate data published.
The SDR Team Lead
The pricing page shows a Free tier of one user and 50 credits, but Pro is 'per user, contact sales' with 'Annual Credit Packages' and Enterprise is 'Custom Packages' — every paid invoice is a sales conversation. What a credit buys, credit expiry, seat and overage prices, the API and the Buyer Intent, Data Enrichment and Autopilot add-ons are unpriced publicly, and the contract mechanics that are public — 12-month auto-renewal, a 60-day cancellation window, a 2% late fee, sales final — cannot offset that. The one refund rule, invalid emails auto-refund a credit, is published. 2 4 1
The RevOps Manager
The only public number I can act on is the free plan's 50 credits; Pro is "Annual Credit Packages" behind "Contact sales" and Enterprise is "Custom Packages", so the invoice is a conversation, not a computation. The terms are open about the commercial mechanics — 12-month auto-renewal, 60-day cancellation notice, a 2% late fee, all sales final — but we found no public information on what a credit costs per data type, credit expiry, per-seat pricing or VAT treatment. 2 4
The Data Protection Officer
The only tier with public numbers is Free at '1 User 50 Credits'; Pro is 'Per User' with 'Annual Credit Packages' behind 'Contact sales' and Enterprise is 'Custom Packages'. We found no public information on what a credit buys by data type, credit expiry or rollover, per-seat costs, overage rates or VAT treatment — the contract mechanics are public (12-month auto-renewal, 60-day cancellation notice, all sales final, opt-in purchases non-refundable), but the annual invoice is not computable from the captured pages. 2 4
The ABM Marketer
The pricing page shows a free tier of one user and 50 credits, but Pro is "per user" with annual credit packages and Enterprise is custom — both behind "contact sales" — so I found no public currency figure for any paid tier. I found no public information on what a credit buys by data type, credit expiry, or extra-seat costs; the annual term, 60-day cancellation notice and automatic 12-month renewal are documented, and the only cost-related refund published is the automatic credit return on invalid emails. 1 2 4
The DACH Sales Director
Only the free tier carries numbers (1 User, 50 Credits); Pro is priced 'Per User' with 'Annual Credit Packages' behind 'Contact sales', and Enterprise is 'Custom Packages'. The terms fix the mechanics — annual subscription, payment in advance, automatic renewal for twelve more months unless cancelled sixty days out, all sales final, a 2% late fee — but what a credit buys, whether credits expire and the per-seat cost are unstated, so the annual invoice is not computable from public pages. 2 4
The Skeptic
The only public price is the Free plan's "50 Credits" for one user; Pro is "Contact sales" with "Annual Credit Packages", Enterprise is "Custom Packages", and we found no public information on what a credit buys per data type, credit expiry, per-seat costs, or pricing for the API and the Data Enrichment, Autopilot and Buyer Intent add-ons. Meanwhile the terms bind buyers to an annual subscription that auto-renews for 12 months unless cancelled 60 days ahead, with "all sales final" and opt-in purchases non-refundable. 2 4
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 10 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 8 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
Sources (6)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage seamless.ai Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page seamless.ai Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy seamless.ai Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Terms of service seamless.ai Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap docs.seamless.ai Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap seamless.ai Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →