Buy LinkedIn comments: price comparison

What is a purchased comment? Unlike any other product in this comparison, it consists of language. Everything else is a counter: a follower is an account, a reaction is a symbol. A comment is a sentence that a publicly named account with a job title writes under your post — and which remains in that account's own activity list.

The catalogues come in two formats, and the difference between them is the most important one on this page. In the first, you supply the text: you provide the sentences and the panel distributes them across accounts. In the second, the panel supplies the text, usually from a stock of generic approval phrases and usually in English. Both sit in the same catalogue, often right next to each other, and both are simply labelled "Comments" there.

That makes this the most demanding product in this category. A counter cannot be wrong, but a sentence can: in its language, its tone, its relevance to the subject. Anyone ordering this service is ordering text that will stand alongside their own.

This page compares 90 catalogue entries from 16 panels for LinkedIn comments. The other services of this network have their own pages: LinkedIn followers, LinkedIn likes and LinkedIn post shares.

Two formats in the same catalogue

Among the pages we read for this search, most sell, and the cheapest offers there give no indication of who writes the text. That is the crucial omission: a cheap comment is almost always a comment from the panel, and a panel comment is a generic English sentence under a German-language professional post.

The understandable case does exist, though. A post without any reply looks unanswered, and the first replies are experience-wise the hardest to get. Anyone who fills a post with their own text is buying a start, and one they have formulated themselves.

The drawbacks are more concrete on this network than elsewhere. A comment appears with name, photo and position, and it additionally appears in the activity list of the commenting account. Two lines of agreement from a profile with no career history sit permanently next to your post, and they are readable for anyone who clicks on the name. What you save by not writing the text yourself, you pay for in this visibility.

We do not recommend buying and do not crown any provider. What this page offers is the price per quantity, the upper limit, and the question of whether a promise from the title is covered by the ordering process.

LinkedIn distributes a post in waves and re-decides after each wave. A reaction is a cheap signal because it costs one click; a comment is an expensive one because someone has written something. Accordingly, it has a clearly stronger effect on distribution — that is the reason this product is traded at all, and why it costs many times a reaction when purchased.

The mechanism has a second half, however, which the sales copy leaves out. A comment generates replies, and replies generate the next wave. A stock of generic sentences of agreement generates no reply, because nobody responds to them — the interaction ends at the point where it should begin.

Then there is the analytics. Your own analysis breaks down, for each post, which industries, functions and regions the readers come from. Purchased comments appear there as entries with no connection to the topic, and anyone who presents these figures to management or an advertising partner presents them along with those entries.

The fair counter-argument: on a post that almost nobody sees anyway, a handful of comments barely changes distribution in either direction. The purchase is then labelling, not leverage.

Involved are Cloutsy, FiveBBC, DripFeedPanel, SMMFlare, YTBot, APISeller, Auto SMM Panel, FansSuply, JungleSMM, Marketerum, SMMExclusive, Stream-Promotion, SMM-1, CrazyPanel, JingleSMM, Solid SMM, InstantPanel, PureSMM, FullSMM, MagnetBoosting, MegaVirality, SMMShiba, SMMTalk, SocNet and Viewsta. The stated status is set by Cloutsy as the oldest snapshot; the newer snapshots do not move it forward.

The catalogue does not stand still between two snapshots. Since 31/10/2026, 0 entries in this scope have a different base price than before, of which 0 went up and 0 went down; 0 rows have been added and 0 have disappeared from the catalogues. The date given is the oldest of these preliminary snapshots, so the row does not claim a freshness that its slowest component does not have.

Comparison only covers the panels that have a second snapshot at all; their number is 17 and is not the number of indexed panels, because a newly added provider has no history yet. As long as this second snapshot is missing, nothing is shown here — a zero would mean "nothing has moved", and that is a measurement, not a gap.

Several panels sell the same goods. Measured across the entire index — not just for LinkedIn — the largest measured overlap is that of MagnetBoosting: 100 % of its entries reappear in similar form at MegaVirality. The direction is part of the statement. For comments, this explains why the same text pool can come from several providers.

For LinkedIn comments, the reliable base price in the index starts at 0.15 € per 1.000 units — this value is listed by Cloutsy — with the middle of the field at 44.64 €. Both figures are purchase prices at wholesale level.

Comments are the most expensive product category on this network, and the reference quantity per thousand units can easily be misleading. Hardly any entry in this scope accepts orders of that size at all — the figure is a conversion, not an orderable quantity. Anyone comparing should scale it down to the quantity they actually need, which for a single post is rarely more than a handful.

The price range within the page is explained mainly by the origin of the text. An offer where you supply the sentences costs more than one with a pool, because a different text has to be set for each account. This surcharge is thus one of the few in this market backed by traceable extra work.

The second surcharge concerns language and country, and it is the steepest. Rows explicitly labelled as German sit far above the rest of this scope in price while accepting the smallest quantities.

Anyone familiar with the prices of German-speaking shops will see a different order of magnitude here. This is no criticism of the shops: they carry payment processing, language, liability and advertising.

• Zero prices appear in the raw catalogues, but they are not prices. They are almost always placeholder or test entries from the panels. In this scope there are 0 such rows; they do not feed into any minimum, median or 'from' figure.
• 0 entries list quantity limits that are technical placeholders rather than orderable sizes. They remain in the list, but they do not count as a real order limit.
• The displayed euro amount is derived from the catalogue's dollar price at a rate of 0.8951 euro per dollar, as of 30/10/2026. The dollar value remains visible on the offer.

The smallest orderable quantity in the priceable stock on this page is 1 units. For comments this number is practically the most important one on the entire page, because the entries cap out early; the number of offers that additionally sell only in fixed multiples is 0.

Every catalogue entry carries two kinds of statement from the same interface. The name sells: text origin, refill window, daily output, start time, origin, quality tier. The fields alongside state plainly whether refill, dripfeed and cancellation are technically provided for. The name describes the offer, the field describes the ordering path.

For comments, refill has a particular meaning. What drops out here is not stock but text: if the commenting account is removed, the sentence disappears from the thread, and the reply chain beneath it is left without a beginning. The number of offers in scope where the panel itself reports the refill field as set is 2 — there, a replacement could be triggered without a ticket. We show where refill is genuinely automatic.

Conversely, a refill promise can appear in the name without the field being set. As a rule this does not mean that no replacement exists — it means you cannot trigger it yourself and must register it with the panel's support. For a product made of text, that is a longer route than usual, because someone first has to establish which sentence is missing.

Quality claims such as 'real users', 'HQ' or 'Real Users' remain self-declarations by the seller. We translate them into comparable tiers and note that they are assertions. For comments the assertion is unusually easy to check — though only after ordering, and then by every reader of your post.

We do not rate how good a panel's support is; that could only be tested with test orders. What we show is the question before that: whether you need it for a promised service at all.

For no other service type does language decide the result so directly. An English agreement sentence under a German professional post is not a quality flaw that would need measuring — every reader sees it at a glance.

The catalogues know this and list separate rows for it. 2 entries in scope name Germany itself; they are the most expensive and the smallest in quantity on this page. A second, larger set names a region that includes Germany — that is a different promise and sits behind a different filter on our side.

The difference between country and language is important. A country tag says something about where the accounts come from, not about the language of the text. With an offer that carries its own text, you supply the language yourself anyway; with a pre-stocked offer, the language is a promise from the seller, and a 'Worldwide' label is not one.

LinkedIn's terms of use prohibit automated accounts and artificial interaction. Enforcement falls mainly on the commenting accounts; the sentence disappears along with the account. A ban on your own profile is the rarer case — but it is still costly, because a professional profile carries a network that cannot simply be recreated.

One risk of this product is of a different kind and has nothing to do with the platform: the text appears under your name. A sentence delivered by the panel that makes a statement about your services or your clients is a statement that stands next to your post, and nobody is reachable for it. Anyone who supplies their own text does not carry this risk.

The third level is business dealings. If you present purchased engagement to a client, an investor or an advertising partner as genuine demand, you are moving into competition law and no longer only into platform rules. This paragraph is not legal advice.

Payment is made to the panel, not to us. The usual arrangement is a balance account: you load an amount and order from it. For business purchases the invoice is the real hurdle — of 16 panels in this scope, 2 issue one. We maintain this information by hand from the panels' documentation, because no interface reports it.

No panel needs your password. For comments, the public address of the post is enough. Any request to enter login details or to authorise an application is a reason to abort.

Outgoing links to the panels are partner links. This does not change the order: sorting is by calculated price, before any link exists.

On LinkedIn, comments are the currency in which visibility is created — though in the opposite direction to what is often assumed. Anyone who replies visibly under other people's posts in their own field is read by the audience of the other person, and this route is more predictable on this network than on any other. It costs time rather than money and cannot be ordered.

The second organic lever is the first hour. A post that asks a concrete question receives answers from people who were shown it — and those answers generate the follow-up waves that an order is supposed to shortcut.

The compliant route involving money is the platform's advertising. It delivers no comments, but reach, and reach is the precondition for anyone to reply at all. If you have a budget, honestly weigh the prices on this page against it.