Zopto Now Redirects to Zeekeo: What the 301 Means for Buyers

Type zopto.com into a browser today and you do not land on Zopto. You land on zeekeo.com/pricing, after an HTTP 301 and two further hops, on a page that mentions the word Zeekeo fifty five times and the word Zopto not once. Verified by direct fetch on 16 August 2026.

That single fact outranks everything else a buyer needs to know about Zopto, and almost none of the roundups still ranking for the name mention it. They quote three Zopto plan tiers by name, with monthly figures and a requirement to hold LinkedIn Premium or Sales Navigator. Those figures are not reproduced here, because they describe a product page that no longer answers at that address and no current vendor surface publishes them.

What the redirect actually does

The chain is worth stating precisely, because a redirect is evidence and a rumour is not.

1. Step 1Request

   https://zopto.com/ with a desktop browser user-agent

2. Step 2HTTP 301

   Location header points at https://zeekeo.com/pricing/

3. Step 3Two further hops

   Canonicalisation onto the www host

4. Step 4Final 200

   https://www.zeekeo.com/pricing, 52,480 bytes, title 'Pricing'

Both zopto.com/ and zopto.com/pricing/ resolve to the same destination and return byte-identical documents. Byte-size equality across two different request paths is the standard signal that neither path is being served its own content, and here it is doing exactly that: the domain is a pointer now, not a site.

What sits at the other end

The Zeekeo pricing page splits into a self-serve product and a managed service, and publishes a figure for each.

Zeekeo DIY$149 per seat per month

• Described as the system that powers the managed service
• Prospecting and data enrichment
• Email and LinkedIn outreach in one motion
• AI messaging and sequences
• A/B testing, analytics dashboards
• CRM integrations for HubSpot and Salesforce
• Zapier and API access
• Seat discounts offered above one seat

Zeekeo Done-For-YouFrom $600 per month

• Described as building and running the whole outbound motion
• Custom outbound strategy and ICP alignment
• Campaign roadmap and execution plan
• Audience research and targeting
• Booked through a strategy call rather than checkout

The page also carries a monthly and a quarterly billing state, with the quarterly state marked as saving more than 20 percent, and a promotion code offering a free month. Both billing states render into the same document, so a figure read out of the raw page is not automatically the figure a visitor sees first.

Why this matters more than a feature comparison

A brand that has folded into another brand changes three things at once for a buyer, and none of them is about features.

The contracting entity changes. Whoever you would have been paying is not who you would be paying now, and the terms you find quoted in a two-year-old review were agreed with a company that no longer sells under that name.

The pricing model changes shape. The tiers third-party pages still attribute to Zopto were flat monthly plans at three volumes. What the destination publishes is a per-seat rate plus a managed service with a floor. Those are different commercial structures, and a per-seat rate scales with headcount rather than with sending volume.

And the review corpus goes stale silently. Every "Zopto review 2026" page ranking today was written against a product surface that has been repointed. The reviews are not lying; they are describing something at an address that now serves something else. This is the same failure mode that made checking brand liveness a standing step before any vendor comparison, and it is invisible unless someone actually resolves the domain.

How to check this yourself, for any vendor

The method that surfaced this is cheap and repeatable, and it is worth running before any tool comparison rather than after.

Resolve the domain and follow the redirects, rather than reading a review. A 301 with a Location header pointing at a different brand is unambiguous. So is a page that returns a 200 while carrying zero occurrences of the vendor's own name.

Compare byte sizes across two different paths on the same host. Identical byte counts for / and /pricing/ mean neither path is being served its own content, which is what a blanket redirect or a catch-all looks like from outside.

Read the title tag. A parked, repurposed or redirected domain routinely returns a full-size well-formed body, so neither the status code nor the response length tells you anything on its own. The title and the visible copy do.

Brand-liveness checks before quoting any vendor figure

• ✓Yes: Resolve the domain and follow every redirect to the final URL
• ✓Yes: Confirm the vendor's own name appears in the served page
• ✓Yes: Compare byte sizes across two paths to catch a catch-all
• ✓Yes: Read the title tag rather than trusting the status code
• ✓Yes: Quote figures from the page you fetched, with the date
• ✕No: Trust a third-party roundup's price without re-checking it
• ✕No: Read an empty pricing fetch as evidence the vendor publishes nothing

That last line matters in this category specifically. Several LinkedIn tools render their pricing client-side, so a plain fetch returns a full page with no figures on it at all. That is a failed read rather than a finding about the vendor, and treating it as a finding is how wrong prices get published.

What to do if you were evaluating Zopto

Establish the entity and the terms before anything else. Ask which legal entity invoices, whether accounts opened under the Zopto brand carry forward on their original terms, and whether the published Zeekeo rates are the rates available to an inbound enquiry.

Then re-run the evaluation against what is actually being sold. A $149 per seat self-serve tool and a $600 a month managed service are answers to two different questions. If the reason Zopto was on your list was cloud-based LinkedIn sending at a fixed monthly cost, the shortlist worth rebuilding is the one in LinkedIn automation tools, which sets out the architecture split that decides account risk.

If the reason was that you wanted the work done rather than the software owned, that is a managed-service decision and it belongs next to LinkedIn lead generation services, where the question is what is safe to outsource rather than which sequencer to buy. A rebrand also resets the renewal question. If you are already paying under the old name, the things to establish are whether your current rate is grandfathered, what notice period applies, whether your data and campaign history migrate, and who supports the account in the meantime. None of those are answered on a pricing page, and all of them are cheaper to ask before a renewal date than after one.

There is a second-order effect worth naming. A tool that has been absorbed usually stops shipping against its old roadmap, because engineering effort moves to the surviving product. That is not a reason to avoid the destination, and it is a reason to weight your evaluation toward what the product does today rather than what its changelog promised last year.

The part that has not changed

Whatever the brand on the invoice, the platform underneath is still LinkedIn, and LinkedIn's own position on third-party automation has not moved. Its User Agreement, effective 3 November 2025, prohibits members from developing, supporting or using "software, devices, scripts, robots or any other means or processes (such as crawlers, browser plugins and add-ons or any other technology) to scrape or copy the Services", and separately from using bots "or other unauthorized automated methods to access the Services, add or download contacts, send or redirect messages".

LinkedIn's help documentation on prohibited software and extensions is blunter still. It states that LinkedIn does not permit third-party software "that scrape, modify the appearance of, or automate activity on LinkedIn's website", and that any member using such tools "risk having their accounts restricted or shut down" as well as the tools becoming non-functional without notice.

No vendor's safety messaging changes that. What changes is how much of your pipeline is exposed to one account when it happens. The operating answer is spreading volume across many warmed sender accounts at low per-account rates rather than pushing one profile hard, which is the model behind our own LinkedIn work through HeyReach.

The one number LinkedIn does publish

Almost every limit quoted in this category comes from third-party observation rather than from LinkedIn. Two exceptions are worth holding on to, because they come from LinkedIn's own help pages.

Basic and free members can attach a personalised note to five connection requests per month, and Premium members can attach one to every request. And LinkedIn's page on invitation restrictions states that an account restricted from sending invitations typically stays restricted for a week, that withdrawing pending invitations will not lift it, and that after withdrawing an invitation you cannot re-invite that person for up to three weeks.

That last mechanic is the one that quietly breaks high-volume plans. A withdrawal-and-retry loop, which is what many tools call list hygiene, buys a three week lockout per contact.

What a cloud LinkedIn tool is actually buying you

Strip the branding off this category and every cloud tool sells the same three things, which is why a rebrand changes less about the product than it does about the contract.

The first is scheduling that survives your laptop closing. A browser extension stops when the browser stops, so a campaign running from a machine that sleeps at six o'clock is a campaign with a working day. Cloud tools run the session on vendor infrastructure instead.

The second is an IP that stays put. Cloud sending means LinkedIn sees the account arriving from an address that is not the one it has associated with that member for years, so the vendors assign a dedicated proxy, usually matched to the account's stated country. Consistency is the property being bought. A rotating datacentre pool underneath an account with three years of single-city history is worse than no proxy at all.

The third is a place to read replies. Once more than one account is sending, a unified inbox stops being a convenience and becomes the only way anyone answers a prospect inside a day.

Price those three against whatever the destination brand charges, and ignore the feature lists on both sides. Sequence branching, image personalisation and template libraries are real features that almost never decide whether a channel works.

Where this leaves the name

Zopto as a purchasable product under that name is not what the domain sells today. The honest answer to a search for it is the redirect, the destination's published figures, and the advice to price the thing that actually exists rather than the thing the reviews remember.

Pair whatever tool you land on with email rather than running it alone, because a single-channel LinkedIn motion inherits every platform risk above with nothing behind it. That split is covered in LinkedIn prospecting, and if you would rather have the sender infrastructure and the ramp discipline already running, get a free campaign plan and we will map the channel to your ICP before anything sends.

Pricing and features verified as of August 2026. Verify current terms with the vendor before relying on them.