Discord at the panels: the server and nothing else

Discord has exactly one product in this comparison, and that is down to the platform: it shows hardly any figures publicly. Across all indexed panels there are 377 orderable entries in 9 performance tiers from 14 catalogues — practically all of them deliver members to a server.

The goods fall into two formats, which appear in the offer name and nowhere else. One delivers accounts that are permanently shown as offline in the list; the other delivers accounts shown as online. The price difference between the two is the biggest difference in this whole slice, and it determines how a server looks to visitors.

Anything else on Discord that could be counted happens behind server sign-up. There are no offers for that, which is why there is no second page here.

One figure still belongs to the picture, because it comes from the fields rather than the titles: the number of offers in this network for which the panel reports a refill through its own interface is 0. This refers to the variant you can trigger yourself; what the offer name states is a promise, not a field. For server members who leave again after weeks, that is practically the most important property after the price.

The lowest price-eligible base price in this network is 0.27 € per thousand units, and the middle of the range sits at 9.97 €. The lower value is currently set by SocNet — that is a property of a single catalogue, not a market condition, and at the next draw it may sit with a different provider. Both are wholesale-level purchase prices, not what a German-language sales page charges for it.

Members is the only page in this network. It distinguishes the two formats and says how to recognise them in the offer name.

If you are looking for the comparison across all networks, you will find it in the Panel comparison; whether buying is worthwhile is covered on Buy followers.

The catalogue does not stand still between two exports. Since 31/10/2026, 27 entries in this scope have a different base price than before, of which 0 upwards and 27 downwards; 0 rows have been newly added and 0 have disappeared from the catalogues. The stated point in time is the oldest of these earlier exports, so that the row does not claim a freshness its slowest component does not have.

Comparison is only made across panels that have a second export at all; their number is 14 and is not the number of indexed panels, because a newly added provider has no history yet. As long as this second export is missing, nothing is shown here at all — a zero would mean "nothing has moved", and that is a measurement, not a gap.

Two details appear in no panel interface and are therefore maintained by hand from the providers' own statements: whether a provider issues a proper invoice and which payment methods it accepts. The number of providers with an invoice in this scope is 1. Since 30/08/2026, none of these details has gone unchecked here — the oldest check is shown rather than the most recent, because a date based on the last check would hide the providers that nobody has looked at for longest. The number of providers with no check at all is currently 0.

Where entries from different providers within a tier match each other down to the quantity limits, we record them as a group and mark the more expensive lines with a note that they probably sell the same source — not all of them, because where the price gap can only be a counting error, the note is omitted. The number of groups touching this slice is 32, the number of marked rows is 51. The word "probably" matters: no panel writes into its interface who it buys from, and two identically cut lines are a hint, not proof. What touches this slice is also counted — the groups do not split the stock. How this is measured is set out in the Panel comparison.