Reply vs Birdeye
These two products are not in the same category, and that is the first thing to know before comparing rows. Birdeye is a reputation management suite sold per location, from 299 $ a month on the entry plan it advertises on annual prepay. Reply is a single tool, at 14 € a month, that answers your Google reviews and nothing else.
So the right question is not "which is better" but "which matches what you have". Here is enough to decide.
No commitment · Cancel in one click
The comparison, line by line
| Criterion | Reply | Birdeye |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Answering Google reviews | Reputation, generation, messaging, social |
| Published price | 14 € a month, 49 € for up to five businesses | From 299 $ per location per month |
| Commitment | Monthly, cancel in one click | Entry price on annual prepay |
| Getting started | By yourself, in an afternoon | Onboarding and a demo |
| Review sources | Google only | Google and dozens of others |
| Approval on negatives | By default, nothing without you | Per the rules you configure |
| Approval channel | Telegram, WhatsApp at launch | Dashboard and mobile app |
| Number of locations | Up to five | No practical limit |
Birdeye figures are the ones Birdeye publishes. Ours are the ones on our own pricing page.
Which to choose, without hedging
Take Birdeye if you run more than five locations, if your reputation lives across several review platforms, if you need generation campaigns, or if someone in your organisation has time to drive a suite. Those are four good reasons, and Reply answers none of them.
Take Reply if you run one to five businesses, if reviews already arrive on Google and the problem is answering them, and if you want a published price with no quote and no commitment.
If you are still unsure, look at your profile: the number of unanswered reviews over the last three months is the best indication of what you need.
What a table compares badly
The real cost of a tool is not its subscription, it is the time it asks for. A full suite costs hours of configuration at the start and a regular visit afterwards. A tool that sends its approval requests into a conversation costs only the second it takes to press a button.
Conversely, a tool that does one thing will never do the second. If you find out in six months that your TripAdvisor reviews matter just as much, you will be buying another tool rather than switching a module on.
Where Reply is better
- The price for a single business, with no quote and no annual commitment.
- Approval in a conversation rather than a dashboard.
- The tone, taken from your past replies published on Google.
- Per rating band settings, with negatives protected by default.
Where Birdeye is better
- Coverage: dozens of review platforms, not just Google.
- Review generation through SMS and email campaigns.
- Running a network, with roles, permissions and consolidated reporting.
- Depth of analysis and competitor tracking.
How to decide on evidence
Reply can be tried without talking to anyone: account created, profile connected, seven days to see its drafts on your own reviews.
Look at the draft for a two or three star review rather than a five star one. That is where a tool is judged: does the reply acknowledge the problem without apologising for everything, and does it sound like you?
In Reply, a review flagging hygiene, safety, discrimination or a legal threat always comes back to you, whatever your automation settings.
Common questions
Is Reply cheaper than Birdeye?
For one location, yes, clearly. But the two do not sell the same thing: comparing prices row by row only makes sense if replies are all you need.
Can I move from Birdeye to Reply without losing anything?
Replies you have published stay on your Google profile: they do not live in the tool. What you lose is the data specific to the platform you leave.
What if my network grows?
Reply stops at five profiles. Above that, a suite becomes the right call again, and we will say so rather than sell you a tool that is too small.