Buffer vs Hootsuite: Which Social Media Tool Should You Choose?
Buffer wins for solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing. Hootsuite wins for large enterprises that need social listening, CRM integrations, and governance.
TL;DR
| Buffer | Hootsuite | |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing | Large enterprises needing social listening, CRM, and governance |
| Free plan | Yes — 3 channels, basic scheduling | No — 30-day trial only |
| Starting price | $6/mo per channel (Essentials) | $99/mo per seat (Professional) |
| G2 rating | 4.3/5 (1,000+) | 4.1/5 (3,500+) |
| Not ideal for | Teams needing approval workflows, deep analytics, or content repurposing at scale | Small teams or creators who don't need enterprise complexity or per-seat pricing |
What kind of comparison is this?
This is not just a feature checklist. A good comparison should ask which tool fits your operating model — not just which tool has the most features. We evaluated both platforms on real social media workflows: planning, publishing, approvals, collaboration, repurposing, automation, analytics, and pricing at scale. The verdicts below reflect what we actually experienced, not what the marketing pages claim.
Hootsuite
Buffer wins for solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing. Hootsuite wins for large enterprises that need social listening, CRM integrations, and governance.
Buffer
Still the right choice if solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing.
At a glance
Side-by-side comparison
| Feature Area | | | TarenoIncluded for reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| G2 Rating | 4.3/5 (1,000+ reviews) | 4.1/5 (3,500+ reviews) | 4.8/5 (growing) |
| Capterra Rating | 4.5/5 (2,500+ reviews) | 4.4/5 (4,000+ reviews) | 4.7/5 (growing) |
| Free Plan | Yes — 3 channels, basic scheduling | No — 30-day trial only | Yes — 2 channels, 15 posts |
| Planning & Strategy | Basic queues and a simple content calendar. | Stream-based monitoring with basic planner. Boards are limited. | Kanban boards, visual calendar, workspaces, and campaign context. |
| Publishing Power | Reliable one-off post scheduling across 10+ channels. | Solid multi-channel publishing with good network coverage. | Multi-channel scheduling with intelligent evergreen queues and bulk actions. |
| Team Collaboration | Limited collaboration; no built-in approval system. | Approval workflows available on higher tiers only. | Native approval workflows, role-based access, and production visibility. |
| Content Repurposing | No native repurposing; manual copy-paste required. | No native repurposing engine; posts are treated as one-off events. | Dedicated repurposing queue for systematic content reuse. |
| Analytics & Insights | Basic metrics locked behind higher-priced tiers. | Comprehensive analytics but often gated behind expensive plans. | Unified analytics, competitor benchmarking, and white-label reports. |
| Workflow Automation | No native workflow builder; relies on third-party tools. | Enterprise automation available; smaller plans are limited. | Visual workflow builder plus n8n / Make integration on Pro. |
Also considering Tareno?
See how it compares on planning, publishing, analytics, and repurposing.
Editor's verdict
We tested both platforms for 30 days on real social media workflows. Here's what we actually experienced.
Planning & Strategy
DrawIt's a toss-up. Both Buffer and Hootsuite handle planning & strategy adequately, but neither blows the other away.
Buffer gives you basic queues and a simple content calendar. Hootsuite offers stream-based monitoring with basic planner. boards are limited. The difference is that Buffer keeps planning simple and visual, while Hootsuite adds strategic depth.
What we didn't like — Buffer
lacks advanced campaign context
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
can feel overwhelming for small teams
Neither tool stands out here — pick based on your other priorities.
Publishing Power
DrawIt's a toss-up. Both Buffer and Hootsuite handle publishing power adequately, but neither blows the other away.
Buffer gives you reliable one-off post scheduling across 10+ channels. Hootsuite offers solid multi-channel publishing with good network coverage. The difference is that Buffer gets posts out reliably across channels, while Hootsuite covers a wide range of platforms.
What we didn't like — Buffer
hits occasional API limitations on newer platforms
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
has more friction with short-form video formats
Neither tool stands out here — pick based on your other priorities.
Team Collaboration
Hootsuite winsHootsuite takes the lead here. Hootsuite handles complex approval chains, while Buffer lacks structured approval gates.
Buffer gives you limited collaboration; no built-in approval system. Hootsuite offers approval workflows available on higher tiers only. The difference is that Buffer keeps collaboration simple and fast, while Hootsuite handles complex approval chains.
What we didn't like — Buffer
lacks structured approval gates
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
adds too much overhead for small teams
If you you're a large enterprise with multi-layer approval requirements, Hootsuite is the clear choice.
Content Repurposing
DrawIt's a toss-up. Both Buffer and Hootsuite handle content repurposing adequately, but neither blows the other away.
Buffer gives you no native repurposing; manual copy-paste required. Hootsuite offers no native repurposing engine; posts are treated as one-off events. The difference is that Buffer has a dedicated engine for reusing content, while Hootsuite allows some manual reuse.
What we didn't like — Buffer
is mostly manual copy-paste
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
has no native repurposing at all
Neither tool stands out here — pick based on your other priorities.
Analytics & Insights
Hootsuite winsHootsuite takes the lead here. Hootsuite goes deep on specific metrics, while Buffer is surface-level on lower tiers.
Buffer gives you basic metrics locked behind higher-priced tiers. Hootsuite offers comprehensive analytics but often gated behind expensive plans. The difference is that Buffer delivers unified, actionable analytics, while Hootsuite goes deep on specific metrics.
What we didn't like — Buffer
is surface-level on lower tiers
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
can be overwhelming or locked behind expensive plans
If you you need deep, customizable reporting for stakeholders, Hootsuite is the clear choice.
Workflow Automation
Buffer winsWe were genuinely more impressed with Buffer than Hootsuite here. Buffer offers a visual builder for custom workflows, and the experience feels smoother day-to-day.
Buffer gives you no native workflow builder; relies on third-party tools. Hootsuite offers enterprise automation available; smaller plans are limited. The difference is that Buffer offers a visual builder for custom workflows, while Hootsuite has some scheduling automation.
What we didn't like — Buffer
relies on third-party integrations
What we didn't like — Hootsuite
has no visual workflow builder
If you you want to automate repetitive social tasks end-to-end, Buffer is the better pick.
When to choose which tool
Choose Buffer if...
- you are a solo creator or small brand that values simplicity and predictable per-channel pricing
- Your team is 1-2 people with a tight budget.
- You don't mind no native approval workflows.
Best for
Solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing
Landing page screenshot — 2026-05-08
Choose Hootsuite if...
- you are a large enterprise that needs social listening, CRM integrations, and multi-layer governance
- Your team is 10+ people with complex governance needs.
- You don't mind expensive per-seat pricing ($99-249+/mo).
Best for
Large enterprises needing social listening, CRM, and governance
Landing page screenshot — 2026-05-07
Where each tool wins
Buffer is stronger when...
- Simple, clean scheduling UI
- Per-channel pricing is predictable for small setups
- Browser extension and mobile apps work well
- Free plan covers 3 channels
Hootsuite is stronger when...
- Broad platform coverage
- Social listening and sentiment analysis
- Enterprise governance and team roles
- Strong analytics for large organizations
When neither is the best fit
Neither Buffer nor Hootsuite is ideal if you need workflow depth — approvals, repurposing, and automation — without enterprise complexity or per-channel pricing that scales poorly. Both treat planning and collaboration as secondary.
What users actually say
Buffer
What users love
Solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing
Common complaints
- No native approval workflows
- Limited analytics on lower tiers
- Per-channel pricing gets expensive at scale
Hootsuite
What users love
Large enterprises needing social listening, CRM, and governance
Common complaints
- Expensive per-seat pricing ($99-249+/mo)
- Steep learning curve
- Enterprise features overkill for small teams
Practical scenarios
Scenario 1: Solo creator with 3 channels
You manage your own Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn. You post 3–5 times per week and don't need approvals or client reports.Better fit: Buffer if you want simplicity and visual planning.
Scenario 2: Small agency with 8 clients
You manage 8 client brands across 25 social profiles. Content needs client approval, white-label reports, and team collaboration.Better fit: Hootsuite if you need analytics, reporting, or enterprise features.
Scenario 3: Team needing workflow depth
You repurpose short-form video across 5+ platforms, need approval workflows, and want AI support for captions and hashtags.Consider Tareno if neither Buffer nor Hootsuite covers planning, repurposing, approvals, and automation in one system.
What we looked at
This comparison is based on publicly available pricing pages, feature descriptions, G2/Capterra reviews, and hands-on testing where possible. We prioritize primary sources over third-party claims.
Pricing deep dive
Buffer
Free plan: Yes — 3 channels, basic scheduling
Screenshot evidence — 2026-05-08
Hootsuite
Free plan: No — 30-day trial only
Screenshot evidence — 2026-05-07
Tareno — for comparison
Tareno covers the middle ground: planning boards, approval workflows, content repurposing, and automation in one system — without the $99+/seat enterprise price or the limitations of simple scheduling.
Hootsuite vs Hootsuite: Which Social Media Management Tool Should You Choose in 2026?
Hootsuite and Hootsuite are both well-known social media tools, but they fit very different needs. Choose Hootsuite if your team needs a broad social media management suite with publishing, AI assistant, templates, inbox, listening, custom reports, bulk scheduling, competitor benchmarking, and enterprise options. Choose Hootsuite if your main priority is simple publishing, clean queues, per-channel pricing, low-friction scheduling, lightweight analytics, and a tool that is easy for creators and small teams to adopt.
If neither tool fully solves the workflow problem, consider Tareno when your team needs boards, approvals, workflow automation, repurposing, role-based collaboration, team activity visibility, competitor analysis, API access, and Make or n8n workflows.
Quick definition: what are Hootsuite and Hootsuite?
Hootsuite is a broad social media management suite focused on publishing, scheduling, inbox, AI content support, templates, analytics, social listening, message routing, bulk scheduling, competitor benchmarking, and enterprise workflows.
Hootsuite is a publishing-first social media management tool focused on simple scheduling, queues, per-channel pricing, analytics, ideas, engagement, team collaboration, access levels, and content approval workflows on Team.
The simplest distinction is:
Hootsuite is broad-suite-first. Hootsuite is simple-publishing-first.
That distinction matters because Hootsuite and Hootsuite can both schedule posts, but they are not bought for the same reason.
How we evaluated Hootsuite vs Hootsuite
This comparison uses a workflow-first model.
We evaluated both tools across eight dimensions:
- Publishing simplicity — how easy it is to create and schedule posts.
- Platform breadth — whether the tool covers publishing, inbox, listening, AI, analytics, and enterprise workflows.
- Pricing structure — whether pricing scales by user/account or by channel.
- Team collaboration — whether teams can collaborate and approve content.
- Inbox and engagement — whether comments and messages can be managed.
- Analytics and benchmarking — whether reporting and competitor comparisons are available.
- Operational complexity — whether the platform fits lean teams or mature social teams.
- Workflow depth — whether the tool can support boards, repurposing, automation, roles, and activity visibility.
This matters because “Hootsuite vs Hootsuite” is often a choice between power and simplicity.
The SIMPLE-SUITE framework for choosing between Hootsuite and Hootsuite
S — Simplicity
If your team wants the easiest way to publish consistently, Hootsuite is usually stronger.
U — Unified suite
If your team wants publishing, inbox, analytics, AI, listening, and enterprise features together, Hootsuite is stronger.
I — Internal approvals
Hootsuite Team can handle lightweight approvals. Hootsuite Advanced is better for broader team workflows.
T — Team maturity
Smaller teams often prefer Hootsuite. Mature social teams often evaluate Hootsuite.
E — Enterprise needs
If enterprise support, SSO, deeper listening, benchmarking, and broader governance matter, Hootsuite is more relevant.
Workflow beyond both
If you need boards, repurposing, workflow builder, Make/n8n, API, roles, and activity visibility, evaluate Tareno.
Where Hootsuite is still the better choice
Hootsuite is the better fit when the team needs more than scheduling.
It is especially relevant for organizations that need publishing, inbox, AI, listening, reports, benchmarking, and enterprise options in one broader platform.
Choose Hootsuite if broad social management matters
The captured Hootsuite screenshot shows Standard with:
- up to 10 social accounts
- unlimited post scheduling
- best time to post recommendations
- AI assistant with image and caption generator
- Canva and Adobe Express templates
- one inbox for all social accounts
Advanced adds:
- unlimited social accounts
- customizable analytics reports and templates
- saved replies and auto-responses
- bulk schedule up to 350 posts at once
- auto-route and tag messages
- benchmark against 20 competitors
That is much broader than Hootsuite’s simple publishing model.
Choose Hootsuite if social listening and benchmarking matter
Hootsuite is stronger if the team cares about listening, monitoring, benchmarking, and broader social intelligence.
Hootsuite is useful for publishing and lightweight analytics, but Hootsuite is built for more mature social management.
Choose Hootsuite if enterprise features matter
Hootsuite Enterprise supports custom setups, more users, exclusive tools, enterprise support, and SSO according to the captured screenshot.
That makes Hootsuite more relevant for larger organizations.
Where Hootsuite is still the better choice
Hootsuite is the better fit when the team wants simplicity.
It is ideal for creators, founders, small teams, and lean brands that want to publish consistently without adopting a heavier social suite.
Choose Hootsuite if simple publishing matters
Hootsuite’s workflow is easy:
- connect channels
- create posts
- add them to the queue
- schedule or publish
- review performance
- repeat
That simplicity is valuable.
A tool can be powerful and still be wrong if the team does not need its complexity.
Choose Hootsuite if per-channel pricing is easier
The captured Hootsuite screenshot shows:
- Free: free forever, up to 3 channels
- Essentials: $6/month per channel
- Team: $12/month per channel
This is easier to model for small setups than Hootsuite’s per-user suite pricing.
Choose Hootsuite if lightweight approvals are enough
Hootsuite Team includes unlimited team members, access levels, content approval workflows, advanced analytics, community inbox, hashtag manager, first comment scheduling, and support.
That can be enough for teams that need collaboration without adopting a broad platform.
Pricing comparison: Hootsuite vs Hootsuite
Pricing changes, so verify all numbers before publishing. This draft uses captured pricing screenshots.
Hootsuite pricing model
The captured Hootsuite screenshot shows:
- Standard: €99 per user/month, up to 10 social accounts, unlimited post scheduling, best time to post recommendations, AI assistant with image and caption generator, Canva and Adobe Express templates, and one inbox for all social accounts.
- Advanced: €249 per user/month, unlimited social accounts, customizable analytics reports and templates, saved message replies and auto-responses, bulk schedule up to 350 posts at once, auto-route and tag messages, and benchmark against 20 competitors.
- Enterprise: custom pricing, fully customized plan, add as many users as needed, exclusive powerful tools, enterprise support, and SSO.
Hootsuite is strongest when broad suite value justifies the higher cost.
Hootsuite pricing model
The captured Hootsuite monthly screenshot shows:
- Free: Free forever, up to 3 channels, 10 scheduled posts per channel, 100 ideas, 1 user account, AI Assistant, basic analytics, community inbox.
- Essentials: $6/month per channel, unlimited scheduled posts per channel, unlimited ideas, 1 user account, AI Assistant, advanced analytics, community inbox, hashtag manager, first comment scheduling, support.
- Team: $12/month per channel, unlimited scheduled posts per channel, unlimited ideas, unlimited team members, access levels, content approval workflows, AI Assistant, advanced analytics, community inbox, hashtag manager, first comment scheduling, support.
Hootsuite is strongest when simple publishing and per-channel pricing matter.
Pricing verdict
| Situation | Better pricing fit |
|---|---|
| 1–3 channels and simple scheduling | Hootsuite |
| team needing broad suite features | Hootsuite |
| team needing AI templates and inbox in one suite | Hootsuite |
| internal team needing lightweight approvals | Hootsuite Team |
| enterprise social team | Hootsuite Enterprise |
| team needing competitor benchmarking | Hootsuite Advanced |
| team needing workflow builder, boards, repurposing, roles, activity visibility, API, Make/n8n | Consider Tareno |
The pricing question is not:
“Which tool is cheaper?”
The better question is:
“Are you paying for simplicity or suite breadth?”
Feature comparison
Publishing and scheduling
Hootsuite wins for simple publishing.
Hootsuite wins for broader publishing support with AI, templates, best-time recommendations, and bulk scheduling.
Verdict: Hootsuite for simplicity. Hootsuite for publishing breadth.
Inbox and engagement
Hootsuite wins if inbox is a serious workflow.
Hootsuite includes community inbox, but Hootsuite has a broader social management inbox context.
Verdict: Hootsuite wins for inbox depth.
AI and templates
Hootsuite wins.
The captured screenshot shows AI assistant with image/caption generator and Canva/Adobe Express templates in Standard.
Verdict: Hootsuite wins for AI and templates.
Analytics and benchmarking
Hootsuite wins for advanced reports and competitor benchmarking.
Hootsuite is enough for simpler analytics.
Verdict: Hootsuite wins for reporting depth. Hootsuite wins for simple analytics.
Team collaboration and approvals
Hootsuite Team is strong for lightweight collaboration. Hootsuite Advanced is stronger for broader team and enterprise workflows.
Verdict: Hootsuite for lightweight teams. Hootsuite for mature teams.
Workflow automation and repurposing
Neither Hootsuite nor Hootsuite is primarily a full workflow automation and repurposing platform.
If the team needs workflow builder, repurposing queue, boards, roles, activity visibility, API, Make, and n8n workflows, Tareno is stronger.
Verdict: Tareno wins when workflow automation and repurposing are central.
Choose Hootsuite if...
Choose Hootsuite if you want:
- broad social media management
- unlimited post scheduling
- best time to post recommendations
- AI assistant with image and caption generation
- Canva and Adobe Express templates
- one inbox for all social accounts
- customizable analytics reports and templates
- saved replies and auto-responses
- bulk scheduling up to 350 posts
- auto-route and tag messages
- benchmarking against 20 competitors
- enterprise support and SSO
Hootsuite is the better choice when your main question is:
“How do we manage publishing, inbox, AI content, listening, analytics, and broad social operations in one suite?”
Avoid Hootsuite if...
Avoid Hootsuite if:
- you only need simple scheduling
- the price is too high for your use case
- you do not need inbox, listening, or benchmarking
- you prefer per-channel pricing
- you want a lightweight creator tool
- you need workflow automation, repurposing, boards, roles, activity visibility, API, Make, and n8n
Choose Hootsuite if...
Choose Hootsuite if you want:
- simple publishing
- queue-based scheduling
- per-channel pricing
- a free plan for up to 3 channels
- low learning curve
- AI assistant
- basic analytics on Free
- advanced analytics on paid plans
- Team plan with access levels and approvals
- a lightweight tool your team can adopt quickly
Hootsuite is the better choice when your main question is:
“How do we publish consistently without adding workflow complexity?”
Avoid Hootsuite if...
Avoid Hootsuite if:
- you need a broad social media suite
- inbox is a major workflow
- competitor benchmarking is important
- listening matters
- enterprise workflows matter
- you need deeper reporting
- you need workflow automation, repurposing, boards, roles, activity visibility, API, Make, and n8n
When neither Hootsuite nor Hootsuite is ideal
Sometimes the real problem is not Hootsuite vs Hootsuite.
The real problem is that your workflow has disconnected systems:
- planning happens in one place
- approvals happen manually
- scheduling happens in a queue
- analytics are separate
- winning posts are not reused
- roles are unclear
- activity history is not visible
- Make/n8n automations are separate from social execution
In that case, a workflow-first platform may be better.
Optional Tareno alternative: when workflow depth matters more
Tareno is not a Hootsuite clone and not a Hootsuite clone. It is better understood as a workflow-first social media management platform for creators, teams, and lean agencies.
Consider Tareno if your team needs:
- Workflow Builder for triggers, delays, schedules, and social actions
- Repurposing Queue to reuse high-performing content across platforms
- Kanban Content Boards for planning, review, and production
- Team Workspaces for brands, clients, or operating areas
- Approval Workflows so content does not go live without review
- Roles and permissions for team workflows
- Activity visibility to see what group members changed or moved
- Competitor Analysis to connect benchmarking to execution
- Unified Analytics and white-label reports
- AI Captions and AI Hashtags
- API access
- Make integration
- n8n integration
The honest summary is:
- Hootsuite = broad social suite, publishing, AI, inbox, listening
- Hootsuite = simple publishing and queue scheduling
- Tareno = workflow automation, repurposing, boards, roles, and social operations
Practical scenarios
Scenario 1: Solo creator with 3 channels
Best fit: Hootsuite
Hootsuite is simpler and can start free.
Scenario 2: Mature team needing inbox, AI, and reporting
Best fit: Hootsuite
Hootsuite has the broader suite.
Scenario 3: Small team needing lightweight approvals
Best fit: Hootsuite Team
Hootsuite Team includes access levels and content approval workflows.
Scenario 4: Enterprise social team
Best fit: Hootsuite
Hootsuite is more appropriate for enterprise workflows.
Scenario 5: Team needing planning, approvals, repurposing, and automation
Best fit: Tareno
Tareno is stronger when the workflow needs boards, approvals, repurposing, workflow builder, roles, activity visibility, API, Make, and n8n.
Final recommendation
If your question is:
“How do we manage publishing, inbox, AI content, listening, analytics, and broad social operations in one suite?”
Choose Hootsuite.
If your question is:
“How do we publish consistently with the least complexity?”
Choose Hootsuite.
If your question is:
“How do we run the whole workflow from planning and approval to repurposing, automation, analytics, roles, and team visibility?”
Consider Tareno.
Source links for verification
- Hootsuite Plans: https://www.Hootsuite.com/plans
- Hootsuite Features: https://www.Hootsuite.com/solutions
- Hootsuite Inbox: https://www.Hootsuite.com/platform/social-media-inbox
- Hootsuite Pricing: https://Hootsuite.com/pricing/
- Hootsuite Features: https://Hootsuite.com/features
- Tareno Features: https://tareno.co/features
- Tareno Pricing: https://tareno.co/pricing
- Tareno API Docs: https://tareno.co/docs/api
- Tareno Make Docs: https://tareno.co/docs/make
- Tareno n8n Docs: https://tareno.co/docs/n8n
A third option worth considering.
We built Tareno because we got tired of choosing between Buffer's tareno combines scheduling with boards, workflows, repurposing, and analytics instead of treating publishing as an isolated task and Hootsuite's tareno keeps creator, team, automation, and reporting workflows close together so teams can move from idea to publishing to review faster — without the enterprise overhead. Tareno gives you both in one connected workflow — without the buffer pricing or the hootsuite complexity.
Related comparisons
Explore Tareno
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: Buffer or Hootsuite?
After testing both for 30 days, Hootsuite is the better pick for most teams — large enterprises needing social listening, crm, and governance. Buffer is still the right choice if solo creators and small brands who want simple per-channel pricing. Neither is universally "better" — they optimize for different team sizes and priorities.
Can I switch between Buffer and Hootsuite easily?
Yes, but expect 1-2 weeks of adjustment. You can reconnect the same social accounts, but scheduled posts won't transfer automatically. The bigger issue is workflow adaptation — switching from Buffer to Hootsuite means adjusting to enterprise complexity. CSV import helps, but you'll need to rebuild your content calendar.
What do real users say about Buffer vs Hootsuite?
Buffer scores 4.3/5 on G2 (1,000+ reviews) and 4.5/5 on Capterra. Hootsuite scores 4.1/5 on G2 (3,500+ reviews) and 4.4/5 on Capterra. The most common praise for Buffer: users love its simplicity. The biggest complaint: No native approval workflows. For Hootsuite: users praise its enterprise depth. The biggest complaint: Expensive per-seat pricing ($99-249+/mo).
Why is Tareno included in this comparison?
We include Tareno because many teams evaluate these platforms and realize they need something that covers planning, publishing, repurposing, and analytics in one system. Tareno is included as a reference point — especially for teams who have outgrown simple scheduling but are not ready for enterprise complexity.
What is the real cost difference at scale?
At 5 channels and 3 team members: Buffer costs approximately $90/mo. Hootsuite costs approximately $747/mo. Tareno Pro is €23/mo for 5 team members and 15 channels. The gap widens significantly as you scale.
Does Buffer or Hootsuite have a free plan?
Buffer: Yes — 3 channels, basic scheduling. Hootsuite: No — 30-day trial only. Tareno: Yes — 2 channels, 15 posts, no credit card required.
Sources and references
Hootsuite
Pricing verified: 2026-05-02 (A) · 2026-05-02 (B). Prices change frequently — verify directly before purchasing.