Case study · 01 / 04 · 20253 min read
  • Conversion
  • Monetization
  • Design

Fullbay Connect

How do you turn a half-decade-old Integrations page into a scalable, subscription-tiered service?

Where
Fullbay. Shop management software for heavy-duty repair.
Role
Product designer. UI, tiering model, cross-team delivery
The shipped Fullbay Connect page: connections grouped by job to be done, with plan badges and the Upgrade Plan button in the header.
$1.1M revenue growthNot design-only

At a glance

  1. The problem

    A five-year-old Integrations page with 2,000+ shops on it and a pile of new third-party connections coming that it could not absorb.

  2. What I did

    Rebuilt it on the components the rest of the app already used and collapsed several branded buckets into one tiering model, with plan state and the upgrade path on the page.

  3. What happened

    $1.1M in revenue growth attributed to the launch by the company. No holdout group, so the size is theirs and the direction is mine.

01Scope

  • 2,000+

    shops the page had to serve

  • 3

    problems reframed into design goals

  • 1

    legacy page rebuilt from the ground up

02The challenge

The Integrations page was five years old, visually inconsistent, and already straining under the 2,000+ shops it served. It also had to absorb far more third-party connections in the near future without collapsing again.

This was a UI and monetization project rather than a research one. Competitive analysis, not a research budget. I would rather say that plainly than dress it up as something it was not.

The page as it was. Every connection under its own branded heading, settings scattered per card, nothing to say which plan you were on.

03The goal

How might we make integrations simple, modern, and intuitive?

DatedModern

Rebuild on the Bootstrap 5.3 components already in use across the non-legacy parts of the app, rather than maintaining a second visual language.

ClutteredSimplified

Make the key features findable, retire the underperformers, and show the right content to the right shop.

ConfusingIntuitive

The page carried marketing language and several Fullbay-branded buckets doing duty as price brackets. Collapsing those into one coherent tiering model was the real design problem.

04The solution

Fullbay Connect

One page, grouped by what a shop is actually trying to do. Payments, marketing and communication, parts and labor, with plan state, entitlement and upgrade path legible in the same view rather than scattered across marketing copy.

Fullbay Connect integrations page, showing payments and marketing connections grouped into cards with per-integration toggles and an upgrade path.
Connections grouped by job to be done, with plan state and upgrade path in the same view.
The rebuilt page, in motion. Payments, then marketing and communication, then parts and labor, with the toggle and the upgrade path on every card.
The shipped Manage Your Plan screen: Starter, Plus, Pro and Elite side by side, every integration marked per plan, Downgrade, Current Plan and Upgrade under the prices, and an annual pricing toggle above.
The tiering model as it shipped. Four plans, every integration marked per plan, and the move up or down on the same screen as the entitlement.

05What I dropped

  • A second visual language, a fresh system just for this pagethe non-legacy parts of the app already ran on Bootstrap 5.3. Rebuild on that, and the page stops being a special case the day it ships.
  • The Fullbay-branded buckets doing duty as price bracketsnone of them survived the tiering model. Marketing copy is not a plan.

06The impact

The release video Fullbay shipped it with. About a minute, with sound.
ImpactEvery figure with what it is not
Revenue growth attributed to the launch$1.1M
Churn across the affected base1%Watched because a tiering change is exactly the kind of thing that can push existing shops out.
Overclaims$0.00

Corrections & caveats

Variables
Design was not the only thing that changed, so this is not a design-only result.
Cohort
Post-launch. The revenue figure is the company's, reported against the launch rather than against a held-back control group.
Confidence
Direction yes, magnitude no. This shipped as a redesign and a new subscription tiering model at the same time, so the offer changed alongside the interface. I will not claim the $1.1M for the design alone, and anyone who says they can cleanly separate the two on a launch like this is guessing.
Not measured
  • No holdout group, so there is no counterfactual to compare against
  • How much of the lift is new tier adoption versus existing shops upgrading
  • Longer-term retention on the new tiers

What I will claim: the page went from a five-year-old liability nobody wanted to touch to a surface the business could keep adding to, and the tiering finally read as one model instead of several competing ones.

07What I would measure next

  • Holdoutvs. controlThe one thing this launch never had. Hold back a slice of shops so the lift has a counterfactual.
  • New-tier adoption% of upgradesSplit from existing shops moving up. The number I could not separate.