AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers
MeetGeek
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL · meetgeek.ai
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
MeetGeek at a glance
- Vendor
- AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 5 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Default not stated; pages mention the EU and the US source, captured 5 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 5 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates MeetGeek 3.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. MeetGeek is an AI meeting assistant from AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL of Romania; the EU instance stores customer content in the European Union on AWS, and a separate US instance is run by MeetGeek US Infra, Inc. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 5 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 6 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
MeetGeek is an AI meeting assistant from AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL of Romania; the EU instance stores customer content in the European Union on AWS, and a separate US instance is run by MeetGeek US Infra, Inc. Top marks cluster at 7 to 8 on integrations and workflow, sovereignty and data control and administration, crediting native CRM sync to HubSpot, Salesforce and Pipedrive, a public API with webhooks, a self-hosted open-source MCP server, deletion from active systems within 30 days of closure, and no model training on customer content without express written opt-in. The weakest criteria are consent and co-determination at 6 to 7 and pricing transparency at 5 to 7, the widest score range. Consent mechanics drew praise — recording proceeds only after participants explicitly approve, and incognito recording is unsupported — but per-person sentiment, talk-rate and coachability analytics are documented with no stated default-off or organization-wide switch. Captured pages give different Pro figures, $9.99 per user per month against $15.99, while single sign-on, SCIM and custom retention sit in a custom-priced Enterprise tier.
Speaks for it
- An optional consent request must be explicitly approved before recording proceeds
- The EU instance is contracted through AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania and stores customer content in the European Union on AWS
- Model training on customer content requires express written opt-in, and the prohibition extends to the AI providers by contract
- Native integrations cover CRMs including HubSpot, Salesforce and Pipedrive, plus task, wiki and automation tools
- Customer content is deleted from active systems within 30 days of closure and from encrypted backups within a further 35, with subprocessors directed likewise
Held against it
- The captured pages give different figures for the Pro price — $9.99 per user per month on the pricing page against $15.99 on the homepage
- Single sign-on, SCIM and custom retention are available only in the custom-priced Enterprise tier
- Individual-level sentiment, talk-rate and coachability analytics are documented with no stated default-off or organization-wide switch
- Support conversations run through Intercom in the United States for both instances
- We found no public information naming the provider behind transcription or its accuracy per language
Best for
- You run sales or consulting meetings and want highlights, tasks and summaries pushed natively into HubSpot, Salesforce or Pipedrive and automated through Zapier, Make or n8n
- You want an EU-contracted instance with a published data processing agreement, named subprocessors with locations, and no model training on your content without express written opt-in
- You need recording to start only after participants explicitly approve, with a visible assistant and no incognito mode
- You want to connect AI tools to your meeting archive through a public API with webhooks and a self-hosted open-source MCP server
Avoid if
- You need a computable annual cost from public pages — the captured pages give different Pro figures and the tier carrying single sign-on and SCIM is custom-priced
- Your works council must be able to switch off per-person sentiment, talk-rate or coachability analytics organization-wide — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your impact assessment must name who transcribes the audio — the published subprocessor list names AWS, Intercom, Mixpanel and OpenAI, and we found no public information naming the transcription provider
- You need every support touchpoint inside the EU — support conversations run through Intercom in the United States for both instances
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Recording, transcription & languages | 3.5 of 5 |
| Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge | 3.5 of 5 |
| Integrations, API & workflow | 4 of 5 |
| Consent, participant rights & works council | 3 of 5 |
| Retention, AI training & administration | 3.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 4 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 3 of 5 |
Recording, transcription & languages
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the conversation gets in and how faithfully it is written down: a bot that joins Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet and Webex, botless capture from a desktop or mobile app, in-person meetings and phone calls, file upload, live transcription, speaker identification and names, the languages supported with German stated, meetings that switch language, custom vocabulary for names and jargon, timestamps linked to the recording, and editing of the transcript.
0 — Does not record or transcribe meetings; a note template or agenda tool without capture.
3 — A bot that joins one or two conferencing tools and produces a transcript; languages, speaker names, in-person capture and accuracy are basic or not described.
5 — A bot for Zoom, Teams and Google Meet, a desktop or mobile app for in-person meetings, file upload, speaker identification, German among the supported languages, timestamps linked to the recording, and an editable transcript.
8 — Botless capture documented next to the bot, Webex and phone or dialer calls, live transcription, mixed-language meetings handled, custom vocabulary, speaker names learned across meetings, and the transcription engine or its accuracy per language stated.
10 — Capture a regulated team relies on: every channel above with accuracy published per language and method, dialects and specialist vocabulary documented, on-device or customer-hosted transcription as an option, and how errors are corrected and fed back stated.
The Management Consultant
Capture is broad: bots for Zoom, Teams, Meet and Webex sit next to botless mobile, desktop and browser recording, phone calls and MP3/MP4 upload, and the desktop app records in-person workshops through the computer's built-in microphone — exactly the client-meeting-room scenario I need. Transcription covers 30+ languages with auto-detection of over 100, timestamps and speaker detection, but I found no public information naming German explicitly, on accuracy per language, on custom vocabulary for client names, or on live transcription. 1 2 14 15
The Sales Team Lead
Every capture channel my team would need is documented: bots for Zoom, Google Meet and Teams, Webex and phone calls, bot-free mobile, desktop and browser capture, a macOS/Windows app that records in-person meetings off the room microphone, MP3/MP4 upload, speaker detection and timestamped transcripts in over thirty languages. We found no public information on custom vocabulary, live transcription, mixed-language handling, or accuracy per language, which is what separates the very good from the top tier. 1 5 7 14 15
The Works Council Chair
The bot for Zoom, Teams, Google Meet and Webex is documented next to botless capture — a mobile app, a desktop app that records room audio in person, a browser option, MP3 and MP4 upload, and phone and dialer connections. Speaker detection, timestamps, auto-subtitles and automatic language detection are stated, though the captured pages give different figures for the language count (thirty-plus for transcription, a hundred-plus auto-detected), and we found no public information on custom vocabulary, learned speaker names or per-language accuracy. 1 2 14 15 7
The Data Protection Officer
Bots and bot-free capture are both documented, covering Zoom, Google Meet, Teams and Webex, phone calls, in-person meetings via the desktop and mobile apps, and file upload of MP3 and MP4, with timestamps, speaker detection and over thirty languages stated. The homepage claims auto-detection of over a hundred languages while other pages state thirty-plus, so the captured pages give different figures for language coverage. I found no public information on live transcription, custom vocabulary, per-language accuracy, or which engine transcribes the audio — the last point I would need named before the first recording in my house. 1 2 7 14 15
The IT Lead
Capture is documented through bots, mobile, desktop, browser and upload, covering Zoom, Google Meet, Teams, Webex, in-person and phone calls, with timestamps, speaker detection, editable highlight sections, MP3/MP4 upload and 30+ transcription languages plus auto-detect of 100+. We found no public information on custom vocabulary, live transcription during the meeting, speaker names learned across meetings, or the transcription engine and its accuracy per language, which keeps this just below the top band. 1 2 14 15 5
The Skeptic
Bots, a browser extension, desktop and mobile apps and file upload are each documented, covering Zoom, Google Meet, Teams, Webex, in-person rooms and phone calls, with speaker detection and timestamps tied to the recording. The captured pages give different figures for supported languages — 30-plus on one page, 100-plus auto-detected on another — and we found no public information on the transcription engine, per-language accuracy, custom vocabulary, live transcription or mixed-language meetings. 1 2 7 14 15
Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the tool makes of the transcript: summaries and minutes by meeting type with editable templates, decisions and action items with owners and due dates, summaries in the meeting's language or a chosen one, follow-up emails, clips and highlights, search across all meetings, questions answered over the archive with citations back to the transcript passage, shared team folders or channels, and the minutes exported to Word, PDF or a wiki.
0 — No summaries of any kind; only the raw transcript or recording.
3 — One generic summary per meeting; templates, action items, search across meetings and citations are basic or not described.
5 — Summaries with templates per meeting type, action items and decisions extracted, the summary language selectable with German available, search across meetings, questions answered over one or several meetings, and sharing or export of the minutes.
8 — Custom templates per team, action items with owners pushed to task tools, answers that cite and link the transcript passage they rest on, topic or keyword tracking across meetings, team libraries with permissions, and the AI models used for summaries named.
10 — Meeting knowledge a company can audit: every generated statement traceable to its source passage, hallucination handling and human review documented, summary quality by language stated, and the archive queryable through an API or MCP server with the same permissions as in the app.
The Management Consultant
Minutes by meeting type are real: 30+ templates with automatic meeting-type detection, a template library and custom prompts per section, and Decision, Concern, Fact and Task highlights each carrying the transcript passage and a snippet. Action items push to Asana, ClickUp, Jira or HubSpot, search runs across meetings I did not attend, and the MCP server exposes transcripts, summaries and action items to Claude and ChatGPT, with OpenAI named as the model behind summaries. I found no public information on chat answers that cite the source passage, owners and due dates on action items, or choosing the summary language. 1 5 13 16 17 18
The Sales Team Lead
The summary system is one I could actually shape to a discovery call: a template library with automatic meeting-type detection, per-section prompts you can edit, custom highlights for decisions, concerns, facts and tasks each tied to its transcript snippet, and skills that update CRMs, create tasks and draft emails after the call. Highlights push automatically to HubSpot, Slack or task tools, search runs across meetings by keyword, date and participant, the archive is queryable through API and an MCP server, and OpenAI is named as the provider behind summaries and chat. Action items with owners and due dates, cited answers inside the chat, and any statement about hallucination handling we found no public information on. 1 13 16 17 18
The Works Council Chair
Thirty-plus templates with automatic meeting-type detection, editable summary sections each driven by a visible prompt, and AI highlights for decisions, concerns, facts and tasks that link the transcript passage and a playable snippet. Search across meetings by keyword, date and participant, keyword triggers, topic timelines, comments in the transcript, team spaces, and an MCP server exposing the archive to AI tools, with OpenAI named as the provider for summaries and chat. For owners and due dates on action items we found no public information. 16 17 2 18 13 5
The Data Protection Officer
Summaries come with per-meeting-type templates and auto-detection, editable sections driven by visible prompts, decisions and tasks as highlight types, keyword-triggered highlights, search across meetings by keyword, date and participants, and an AI chat plus MCP server that expose transcripts, summaries and highlights to assistants, with the AI provider for summaries and chat named as OpenAI in the subprocessor list. Each highlight carries the transcript passage it rests on, which is the traceability I want, but answers from the chat are not documented as citing their source passage, and we found no public information on summary language selection, action-item owners with due dates, or hallucination handling. 1 2 13 16 17 18
The IT Lead
There are 30+ templates with automatic meeting-type detection, editable section prompts, Decision/Task/Concern/Fact highlights each linked to the transcript passage and a video or audio snippet, keyword-triggered highlights, a topics timeline, team spaces, search across meetings including ones you were not in, and AI chat plus an MCP server to query the archive, with OpenAI named as the summaries provider. We found no public information on action-item owners and due dates, on whether AI-chat answers cite their source passage, or on Word or PDF export of minutes. 1 16 17 5 13 7
The Skeptic
Thirty-plus templates with editable per-section prompts, decision, concern, fact and task highlights each tied to their snippet and transcript passage, cross-meeting search, topic timelines and keyword tracking, and an MCP server exposing transcripts, summaries and action items to AI tools; OpenAI is named as the provider for summaries, insights and chat. We found no public information on answers that cite the exact passage they rest on, on hallucination handling and human review, or on whether the API and MCP inherit the permissions of the app. 1 5 13 16 17 18
Integrations, API & workflow
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the notes reach the place where work happens: calendar connection with rules for which meetings are recorded, CRM fields filled from the call (HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Microsoft Dynamics), project and task tools, Slack and Microsoft Teams channels, Notion, Confluence and SharePoint, Zapier, Make or n8n, a documented REST API and webhooks, an MCP server for AI assistants, and browser extensions and native apps.
0 — No integrations and no export; the notes stay in the app.
3 — A calendar connection and an email or Slack summary; CRM, API and task tools are basic or not described.
5 — Google and Microsoft calendars, a native CRM integration (HubSpot or Salesforce), Slack or Teams, a task or wiki tool, Zapier or Make, and a documented API or webhooks.
8 — CRM field mapping per meeting type, several CRMs including Microsoft Dynamics or Pipedrive, a full REST API with webhooks and reference documentation, an MCP server, SharePoint or Confluence export, and recording rules per calendar or meeting type.
10 — An integration layer a company builds on: every object reachable by API with rate limits and versioning stated, granular OAuth scopes, data residency kept across integrations, and the integrations administered centrally with logs.
The Management Consultant
Google and Outlook calendars, HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive and Zoho CRMs, Slack, Notion, Confluence and SharePoint, Asana, ClickUp and Jira, Zapier, Make and n8n, plus a documented API with webhooks and both a public and a self-hosted open-source MCP server — this reaches every tool a consultancy works in. Skip-rules and private-by-default settings on Business let me keep confidential client calls out. I found no public information on per-meeting-type CRM field mapping or Microsoft Dynamics. 5 6 7 18 19
The Sales Team Lead
This is the criterion I care about most and it holds up: Google and Outlook calendars with rules to skip meetings, a native HubSpot sync of recordings, transcripts, highlights and tasks to deals, plus Salesforce, Pipedrive, Zoho, Attio, Close and Affinity, Slack, Notion, Confluence and SharePoint, Zapier, Make and n8n, a documented API with webhooks, and both a cloud-hosted MCP server with OAuth and a self-hosted open-source one. What keeps it off the top rung: we found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics, CRM field mapping per meeting type, or published API rate limits and versioning. 5 6 7 18 19
The Works Council Chair
Both major calendars with rules to skip meetings, native CRM sync to HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Zoho and others, task tools from Asana to Jira, Slack, Notion, Confluence, SharePoint, and Zapier, Make and n8n. A public API with webhooks, a cloud-hosted MCP server with OAuth plus an open-source self-hosted variant, and native mobile, desktop and browser clients. For API rate limits, versioning and granular OAuth scopes we found no public information. 5 6 18 19 7
The Data Protection Officer
Google and Outlook calendars drive the joining behaviour with skip rules on Business plans, and a wide native layer covers HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Zoho, Attio, Affinity and Close in CRM, Asana, ClickUp, Jira, Monday.com and Trello in tasks, Slack, Notion, Confluence, SharePoint, OneNote and the storage tools, plus Zapier, Make and n8n. A public API with webhooks and both a hosted and a self-hosted open-source MCP server are documented, alongside browser, desktop and mobile clients. We found no public information on Microsoft Dynamics, CRM field mapping per meeting type, or API rate limits and versioning. 5 6 7 18 19
The IT Lead
For my Microsoft shop this layer is broad: Google and Outlook calendars, HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Zoho and other CRMs, Asana, Jira and ClickUp, Slack, SharePoint, Confluence, Notion, OneDrive and OneNote, Zapier, Make and n8n, a public API with webhooks, and both a cloud MCP server with OAuth and an open-source self-hosted MCP, plus native apps and a browser extension. We found no public information on CRM field mapping per meeting type or on API rate limits and versioning. 5 6 10 18 7 19
The Skeptic
Seven CRMs including Pipedrive and Salesforce, Google and Outlook calendars, task and wiki targets from Slack and Teams to SharePoint, Confluence, Notion and OneNote, three automation platforms, a REST API with webhooks, and both a public and a self-hosted open-source MCP server. We found no public information on CRM field mapping per meeting type, recording rules per calendar, or API rate limits and versioning. 5 6 10 18 19
Consent, participant rights & works council
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether every person in the meeting knows and can decide, and whether the tool can be introduced under German co-determination: a recording notice to all participants including external guests, consent or opt-out before the recording starts, a visible bot or a stated notice for botless capture, rules for when the assistant joins automatically, stopping and deleting a recording on request, per-person analytics (talk time, sentiment, engagement scores) off by default or switchable per organisation, material or a template for a works agreement (Betriebsvereinbarung, § 87 (1) no. 6 BetrVG), and support for a data protection impact assessment.
0 — Built to record people without their knowledge, or sells covert recording or individual performance scoring as a feature.
3 — A general privacy statement and a bot that appears in the participant list; notices to guests, opt-out, per-person analytics and works councils are basic or not described.
5 — A recording notice to participants by chat message, email or the bot's name, a way for a participant to stop the recording or opt out, admin rules for when the assistant joins, recordings deletable on request, and per-person analytics described with how to switch them off.
8 — Consent collected before recording starts for external participants, per-person analytics off by default or switchable per organisation, botless capture with its notice method documented, a works-council information pack or works-agreement template published, DPIA support, and the EU AI Act classification stated.
10 — Co-determination built into the product: every analytic and its granularity documented for the works council, consent and opt-out logged per participant, configuration changes logged, minimum group sizes for any team statistics, and references of works-council-approved rollouts published.
The Management Consultant
Consent before the call is genuinely built: the assistant appears as a visible participant with a chat notice, and with participant consent enabled the standard notice is replaced by a consent request that participants, including external guests, must explicitly approve before recording proceeds, with accept/decline states and host notifications. For a works council the gaps matter: drillable individual analytics, sentiment and coachability scores are marketed with no documented default-off or organisational switch, and I found no public information on a works-agreement template, DPIA support, EU AI Act classification, or a participant's right to stop a running recording. 1 7 20
The Sales Team Lead
The consent flow is genuinely strong: a pre-meeting email to internal and external participants anywhere from a day to ten minutes ahead, an optional consent request that replaces the standard notice so recording only proceeds after explicit approval, tracked with accepted, declined and expired states plus host notifications, a bot visible in the participant list, a stated refusal to support incognito recording, and Germany's two-party consent rule spelled out. For co-determination the evidence thins out: talk-to-listen ratio, sentiment, participant engagement and coachability scores are documented as analytics features, but we found no public information on whether they are off by default or switchable per organisation, on a works-agreement template, on DPIA support, or on an EU AI Act classification. 4 7 10 17 20
The Works Council Chair
Consent can be collected before the recording starts — the notice email is replaced by a consent request, recording proceeds only after explicit approval, declines are tracked and the host notified — the bot is visible in the participant list with a chat notice, pre-meeting notifications reach internal and external guests, and incognito recording is explicitly not supported. But my two demands stay open: talk-time, engagement, sentiment and drillable individual-level analytics are advertised, and while the tracked KPIs can be configured per meeting type, we found no public information on an organisation-wide switch to disable per-person analytics for good. For a works-agreement template, DPIA support and an EU AI Act classification we found no public information. 20 7 4 17 1 22
The Data Protection Officer
What blocks a works-agreement conversation is the analytics: drillable individual-level metrics, sentiment, talk-to-listen ratios and coachability scores are documented with no statement that they are off by default or switchable per organisation. We found no public information on works-council material, DPIA support, or the EU AI Act classification. 1 4 7 17 20
The IT Lead
Consent mechanics are genuinely strong: the assistant is a visible participant with a chat notice, pre-meeting emails can target internal and external participants from a day to ten minutes ahead, and a consent-request mode replaces the notice so recording only starts after participants explicitly approve, with accept, decline and expiry states and host notifications; incognito recording is stated as unsupported and Germany's two-party rule is explained. For a German works council we found no public information on a works-agreement template, DPIA support, EU AI Act classification, or whether the documented per-person analytics such as talk-time ratio, sentiment and engagement can be switched off or defaulted off organisation-wide. 20 22 7 4
The Skeptic
With participant consent enabled, the recording notice becomes a consent request and recording proceeds only after explicit approval; the bot is visible in the participant list, pre-meeting emails can reach external guests, acceptances and declines are tracked, and incognito recording is stated as unsupported — the external participant is genuinely told. But individual engagement, sentiment and talk-rate analytics are documented with no stated default-off or organisation-wide switch, MeetGeek will not delete a recording at a non-owner's request, and we found no public information on a works-council pack, a works-agreement template, DPIA support or an EU AI Act classification. 4 7 17 20 22
Retention, AI training & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the employer can govern: retention periods and automatic deletion of recordings, transcripts and summaries, whether audio and video can be discarded after transcription, sharing defaults and link permissions, customer content excluded from model training by contract, the AI and transcription providers named with their region and their own retention, encryption, single sign-on (SAML), SCIM, roles and workspaces, admin policies on auto-recording and sharing, audit logs, export of the whole archive, and security certifications such as ISO 27001 and SOC 2.
0 — No administration and no deletion; every user decides alone and recordings are kept indefinitely.
3 — Users can delete their own recordings and a security page exists; retention policies, model training, SSO and audit logs are basic or not described.
5 — Retention settings per workspace, customer content excluded from model training, team workspaces with roles, single sign-on, admin control over sharing and auto-recording, encryption at rest and in transit, and ISO 27001 or SOC 2 stated.
8 — Automatic deletion by policy with audio discardable after transcription, the AI and transcription subprocessors named with region and zero retention, SAML with SCIM, granular roles, audit logs, legal hold or export of the full archive, and certifications with their scope published.
10 — Governance an auditor accepts: every retention, sharing and recording policy enforceable centrally and logged, models run on the vendor's own or the customer's infrastructure as an option, audit logs exportable to a SIEM, and the deletion of every copy, including at subprocessors, documented.
The Management Consultant
The written promise I want exists in the terms and the data processing agreement: no training on customer content unless I opt in in writing, and the AI providers are contractually prohibited from it; OpenAI is named with European Union processing, no training and zero data retention for the EU instance. Retention runs by plan with custom and zero-retention policies plus on-premise storage options on Enterprise, SSO with SCIM, org-wide settings and locks, an annual SOC 2 Type II, security logs exportable to a SIEM, and deletion within 30 days of closure with subprocessors directed to do the same. I found no public information on audio being discarded after transcription or on legal hold. 1 7 10 12 13 22
The Sales Team Lead
Retention is governable — plan and workspace settings with custom and zero-retention periods on Enterprise, deletion from active systems within 30 days and from backups within a further 35, subprocessors directed to delete likewise — and training on customer content is contractually prohibited unless the customer opts in in writing, with OpenAI named under no training and zero data retention in the EU instance. Single sign-on with SCIM, org-wide settings and locks, security logging exportable to a SIEM, export of the whole archive, SOC 2 Type II and on-premise storage options on Enterprise complete a picture I could defend to a customer's compliance officer. We found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, legal hold, or granular role documentation. 1 7 11 12 13
The Works Council Chair
Retention is governable: per-plan limits from three months of transcripts on the free tier to unlimited on Business and Enterprise with custom periods on Enterprise, deletion from active systems within 30 days of closure and from encrypted backups within a further 35, export of the archive at any time, SSO and SCIM, org-wide settings and locks, SOC 2 Type II, and no model training without written opt-in, with subprocessors AWS, OpenAI, Mixpanel and Intercom listed with their locations. For customer-facing audit logs, legal hold and discarding audio after transcription we found no public information. 7 11 12 13 10 22 1
The Data Protection Officer
Retention is set by plan and workspace, with audio kept between one month and a year depending on plan, transcripts up to unlimited and zero or custom retention on Enterprise; after closure, content leaves active systems within 30 days and encrypted backups within a further 35, subprocessors are directed to do the same, and the customer can export and delete at any time. Model training on customer content is excluded by the data processing agreement unless opted into in writing, and the subprocessor list names OpenAI for summaries, insights and chat with its region and zero data retention, alongside AWS for hosting, Intercom for support and Mixpanel for analytics. Gaps for my impact assessment: the transcription provider that actually reads the audio is not named, audit logging of user and admin actions is not documented beyond security logging exportable to a SIEM, the SOC 2 scope is available only on request, and we found no public information on how voice profiles are stored or deleted. 1 7 10 11 12 13 19
The IT Lead
Enterprise brings SSO with SCIM, org-wide settings and locks, zero or custom retention, and on-premise storage options; model training requires express written opt-in, the subprocessors are named with regions and zero retention for the AI provider, deletion timelines cover active systems, subprocessors and encrypted backups, encryption at rest and in transit is stated, SOC 2 Type II is audited annually, and customers can export their data. We found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, granular admin roles, legal hold, customer-facing audit logs, or the scope of the SOC 2 report. 7 11 12 13 1 10
The Skeptic
Retention is configurable per workspace with custom and zero-retention on Enterprise, org-wide settings and locks, SSO and SCIM, encryption at rest and in transit, an annual SOC 2 Type II audit, export at any time, and a deletion timeline of 30 days from active systems plus a further 35 days from encrypted backups that also binds subprocessors; training on customer content requires express written opt-in and the ban extends to the AI providers by contract. We found no public information on discarding audio after transcription, admin audit logs of user actions, legal hold, or the transcription provider, and the SOC 2 summary is available only on request. 1 7 10 12 13
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where recordings, transcripts, summaries, voice profiles and account data are stored and processed, which language model and transcription providers read them and where, and who the other subprocessors are (hosting, email, support, analytics and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline. A conferencing platform outside Europe that the customer already uses is part of the meeting, not counted against the notetaker; where the notetaker stores and processes the conversation is.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (language models, transcription, email, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors including the AI providers listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, with transcription and language models run in Europe by European operators, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Management Consultant
The EU instance is contracted by AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania, with customer content stored in the European Union on AWS, Romanian governing law, a published data processing agreement and an Article 27 representative for the US entity. The subprocessor list names AWS, Mixpanel in the EU, OpenAI in the EU region for the EU instance with no training and zero retention, and Intercom in the United States for both instances. OpenAI is not a European operator and the parent company is not stated, which keeps this short of the strongest tier. 10 11 12 13
The Sales Team Lead
The EU instance is contracted by AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania with Romanian governing law and Bucharest courts, customer content stored in the European Union on named AWS infrastructure, and a published data processing agreement listing subprocessors with locations: OpenAI handling AI summaries in the EU for the EU instance with no training and zero retention, Mixpanel in the EU, and Intercom in the US for support. SOC 2 Type II is stated for the vendor, but the parent company is not stated, we found no public information on the transcription provider, and ISO 27001 appears only in connection with AWS, so a fully sovereign chain is not documented end to end. 10 11 12 13
The Works Council Chair
The EU instance is contracted through the Romanian company AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL under Romanian law, with customer content stored in the European Union on AWS, a published data processing agreement, and a subprocessor list naming locations — including OpenAI processing EU-instance summaries in the EU with no training and zero retention. The parent company is not stated, the support tool Intercom runs in the United States for both instances under standard contractual clauses, and the vendor's own ISO 27001 certification is not shown; only AWS's controls are described as ISO 27001 certified. 10 13 12 11
The Data Protection Officer
The EU instance is contracted with AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania under Romanian law, stores customer content in the European Union on named AWS infrastructure, and the subprocessor list names the AI provider OpenAI with processing in the European Union for the EU instance, no training and zero data retention, with a published data processing agreement and an annual SOC 2 Type II audit stated. Three things keep this from sovereign end to end: the parent company is not stated, the support chain runs through Intercom in the United States for both instances, and the transcription provider is not named anywhere, so I could not state in an impact assessment who transcribes the recording or where. 10 11 12 13
The IT Lead
The EU instance is contracted through AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania with content stored in the European Union on AWS, the subprocessor list names locations including OpenAI in the EU region with no training and zero retention plus Mixpanel in the EU, the data processing agreement is published, and SOC 2 Type II is stated. Intercom runs in the United States for both instances, the parent company and ownership structure are not stated, the payment processor is unnamed, and we found no public information on language or transcription models operated by European providers. 10 13 12 11
The Skeptic
The EU instance is contracted through AIVISION PRODUCTS SRL in Romania with content stored in the European Union on named AWS infrastructure, under a published data processing agreement, and the subprocessor list gives locations: OpenAI runs summaries, insights and chat in the EU region for the EU instance with no training and zero retention, while Mixpanel stays in the EU. We found no public information on the provider behind transcription itself or on any parent beyond the Romanian entity, and support conversations run through Intercom in the United States for both instances. 10 11 12 13
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per seat and tier, what counts as a seat (every invited user, only recording users), transcription minutes or credits included, storage limits, which features (CRM integrations, API access, SSO, custom retention, EU hosting, AI credits) cost extra, the free tier and its limits, monthly versus annual billing, minimum seats and VAT.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with seats, minutes or features is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their seat price and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SSO, CRM integration, API, custom retention, EU hosting, minute or credit limits) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (seats, minutes, credits, storage), add-ons priced, what counts as a seat stated, overage handling stated, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given team size and meeting volume, with every add-on, overage and support fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Management Consultant
The tiers are public — Basic free with 3 hours of recording per month, Business at $17 per user per month, Enterprise on request — and Pro's overage is stated at $0.50 per extra hour, with mixed free and paid seats in one workspace and per-tier storage limits listed. However, the captured pages give different figures for the Pro plan ($15.99 with unlimited recording on the homepage, $9.99 per user per month with 20 hours of transcription per month on the pricing page), and yearly billing is only "save up to 40%". I found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term or minimum seats. 1 7 10
The Sales Team Lead
Tiers are public with per-user prices and honest limits — a free plan with three hours of recording a month, Pro with twenty transcription hours and fifty cents per extra hour, Business at 17 dollars per user per month with unlimited transcription, and mixed seats across tiers in one workspace. But Enterprise is 'Custom' and that is where single sign-on, SCIM and custom retention sit, the annual price appears only as 'save up to 40%', VAT treatment is not stated, and the captured pages give different figures for Pro (15.99 on the homepage, 9.99 on the pricing page), so I cannot compute a real annual cost from the public pages alone. 1 7 10
The Works Council Chair
Tiers are public with their inclusions: a free tier with three hours of transcription per month, Pro at $9.99 per user per month on the pricing page with $0.50 per extra hour, Business at $17 per user per month with a 14-day trial, Enterprise at a custom price, mixed seats in one workspace and a yearly discount of up to 40%. The captured pages give different figures for the Pro price ($9.99 against $15.99), Enterprise items such as SSO, custom retention and the DPA sit in the custom tier, and we found no public information on minimum term and VAT treatment. 7 1 10
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing page shows Basic free with 3 hours of recording a month, Pro at $9.99 per user per month with 20 hours of transcription, 6 months of audio and 1 year of transcript storage, Business at $17 per user per month with unlimited transcription and 12 months of video, $0.50 per extra hour on Pro, up to 40% off yearly billing, 30% off for startups, non-profits and education, and mixed seats across tiers. The homepage shows $15.99 for Pro, so the captured pages give different figures for the Pro price, and Enterprise — the tier carrying SSO, SCIM, custom retention and on-premise storage — is custom-priced. We found no public information on what counts as a seat, VAT treatment, or minimum term. 1 7
The IT Lead
The Free, Pro and Business tiers are published with their inclusions, such as transcription hours, storage months and $0.50 per extra hour on Pro, mixed seats in one workspace and unlimited free basic licences; however SSO and SCIM sit on the Enterprise tier at custom pricing, so I cannot budget my four hundred seats. The captured pages also give different figures for Pro, showing $15.99 on one page and $9.99 per user per month on another, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum seats or minimum term. 7 1 10
The Skeptic
Seat prices, monthly transcription hours, storage durations per plan, a stated extra-hour rate, mixed Free, Pro, Business and Enterprise seats, a free tier with its 3 hours of recording per month, a 14-day trial and published discounts are all public. But the captured pages give different figures for the Pro price and its recording allowance, single sign-on and custom retention exist only in a custom-priced Enterprise tier, and we found no public information on VAT treatment or minimum terms — so the real annual cost of a paid team is not computable from the public pages alone. 1 7 10
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about MeetGeek
Is MeetGeek European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies MeetGeek as EU-Made.
Where does MeetGeek store data?
The default storage location for customer data is not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 5 Nov 2026. The vendor’s pages mention the EU and the US as hosting locations, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
Does MeetGeek have a free plan?
Yes. MeetGeek has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 5 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to MeetGeek?
As of 6 Nov 2026, the panel rates Noota (3.5/5), Jamie (3.5/5) and Fellow (3.5/5) highest among the other 14 AI Meeting Assistants & Notetakers products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Noota (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: MeetGeek alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 5 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data processing agreement, Legal entity, Hosting location, Hosting options. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- 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.
- 39 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
- 32 compliance 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
- 30 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
- 10 support 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
- 5 data 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 hosting 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
- 1 legal fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (22)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (recording and transcription) meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (meeting insights) meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (team collaboration) meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Integrations page meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 API overview meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Pricing page meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Security / trust page meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Meeting privacy page meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Terms of service (names both contracting entities) meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Privacy policy meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Data processing agreement (dpa) meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Subprocessor list meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Recording, transcription & languages — found from sitemap meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Recording, transcription & languages — found from sitemap support.meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge — found from sitemap support.meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Summaries, action items & meeting knowledge — found from sitemap support.meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 18 Integrations, API & workflow — found from sitemap meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 19 Integrations, API & workflow — found from sitemap meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 20 Consent, participant rights & works council — found from sitemap support.meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 21 Retention, AI training & administration — found from sitemap meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →
- 22 Retention, AI training & administration — found from sitemap support.meetgeek.ai Checked 5 Nov 2026 Details →