This is an opinion piece. It sets out the view of NerdBible's editors; the facts it relies on are sourced below.
AI website builder promotions should put the renewal price and the credit rules beside the headline monthly rate, in the same size type. That is our position. It applies to the whole category, and we use one live example because it makes the problem easy to see.
What the offer says
At the time of writing, Hostinger's AI Builder page shows a Black Friday offer. The Premium plan is shown at $2.49 a month, marked as 80% off. Beneath that, in smaller text, the page says you can get 48 months for $119.52, against a listed regular price of $585.12, and that the plan renews at $10.99 a month.
The other two plans follow the same pattern. Unlimited is shown at $3.49 a month, with 48 months for $167.52 and a renewal at $16.99. Cloud Startup is shown at $7.99 a month, with 48 months for $383.52 and a renewal at $25.99. On the figures the page gives, the renewal rate is more than four times the promotional rate on Premium, nearly five times on Unlimited, and more than three times on Cloud Startup.
We are not saying anything on that page is hidden or false. The renewal price is on the page. Our complaint is about hierarchy. The number a shopper compares across tabs is the big one, and it describes only the first four years of a prepaid term.
Credits make the comparison harder
AI builders add a second number: credits. The page says Black Friday doubles the AI credits on each plan, for example 500 instead of 250 on Premium. The comparison table on the same page lists AI credits as a one-time gift, at 250, 500 and 1000 across the three plans. The page also says text and image edits in the content editor need no credits, while the conversational Agentic mode needs credits, which can be topped up.
That is useful detail. What the page does not say is how far 250 credits go. A buyer cannot tell whether that is one small site or a month of iteration. A shopper comparing AI builders is partly buying a pile of credits, and nobody has told them how big the pile is. A one-time allowance attached to a four-year prepayment is a different product from a monthly allowance. It should be labelled as clearly as the discount.
The refund terms sit in a different place
The pricing page says all paid plans have a 30-day money-back guarantee, as long as fewer than 30 credits have been used. The separate refund policy, whose page shows a last-revised date of 15 October 2026, says products may be refunded only if cancelled within 30 days of the transaction. It defines the transaction date to include the date a renewal is processed. It says you may cancel at any time, but a refund is issued only inside the refund window. It also lists Hostinger AI Builder credits among products not available for refunds.
Read together, these terms are coherent. A shopper has to read two pages to learn that a 48-month purchase is refundable for the first 30 days and only while credit use stays low. The page says "Cancel anytime". For a prepaid term, that phrase needs the refund window next to it.
The law sets a floor, not a standard
In the US, the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act already covers online subscriptions. For a charge made through a negative option feature, the statute requires text that clearly and conspicuously discloses all material terms before billing information is obtained. It also requires express informed consent and simple ways to stop recurring charges.
The FTC's attempt to write a dedicated click-to-cancel rule was vacated by a federal appeals court in July 2025. As a Kirkland and Ellis alert notes, that did not affect the FTC's existing authority under the statute. The same alert says the FTC began a fresh rulemaking process in March 2026 with an advance notice that proposes no specific rules. We make no claim here about whether any particular page meets the law, and nothing here is legal advice. The point is that a legal floor tells sellers what they must disclose. It does not tell buyers where the information should sit on the page.
The strongest counter-argument
The fair objection is that this is how long-term plans work, and the buyer gets something real for it. A 48-month prepayment gives the vendor cash up front and lower churn, and it is reasonable that the buyer is paid for that with a lower rate. Hostinger's page does state the full term price, the regular price and the renewal rate. It offers a 30-day guarantee and a free trial without a card, with 5 free AI credits to start. Shoppers who want a low entry cost can find it, and anyone who reads the page can work out what they will pay. Insisting on a single mandatory format also risks burying the useful details under disclaimers.
We accept most of that. The discount is real, and the page is more open than many. But the objection proves our case. If the terms are fair, putting them in the headline costs the seller nothing. A buyer who still chooses a four-year plan after seeing the renewal rate has made an informed choice. A buyer who would have walked away at that point was not being well served by a small-print disclosure.
What good looks like
- Show the renewal monthly price next to the promotional price, in the same size and weight.
- Show the total due today and the length of the term.
- Say whether credits are monthly or one-time, and give an example of what a typical allowance builds.
- Put the refund window and any credit-use condition in the plan card, not only on a policy page.
Buyers can do part of this themselves. Before paying, multiply the renewal rate by 12 and compare that figure across builders, rather than the first-term rate. Check whether a free or low-cost builder covers what you need, since a simple site may not need an AI credit allowance at all. Read both the pricing page and the refund policy before entering a card. None of that should be necessary, and the vendors are best placed to fix it.
