Funnel teardown: GitBook (Developer documentation)
Founder(s): Samy Pesse and Aaron O'Mullan

GitBook's funnel runs on the broader-knowledge-platform positioning. The marketing leans into docs-plus-internal-wikis-plus-knowledge-bases as one tool.

TL;DR: GitBook's funnel works because the positioning is broader than dev-tool-docs-specific competitors (Mintlify). The marketing promises one knowledge platform for public docs, internal wikis, and team knowledge bases — which converts buyers who want flexibility over specialization. The lesson for indie founders: when a competitor wins the narrow positioning (Mintlify owns dev-tool aesthetic), the strategic move is to claim a broader scope rather than fight on the same axis.

What they sell: A knowledge platform that handles public documentation, internal wikis, and team knowledge bases with a richer WYSIWYG editor and Git-sync option.
Who it's for: Teams that want a single platform for public docs and internal knowledge, with a writer-friendly editor that non-developer contributors can use.
Pricing: Free tier; Plus ~$8/user/mo; Pro ~$15/user/mo; Enterprise custom (verified 2026-05-17).

Hook pattern: Broader-scope-than-competitors positioning
The hero leads with knowledge-platform breadth rather than docs-specific specialization. This works because buyers comparing GitBook to Mintlify (the docs-specialist) often need internal wikis and team knowledge alongside public docs — and GitBook serves that broader scope while Mintlify does not. The hook positions GitBook in a category Mintlify cannot enter without abandoning its docs-aesthetic identity.

Story pattern: Multi-use-case demonstration
Story is told through use-case examples spanning public docs, internal wikis, customer-facing knowledge bases, and team knowledge libraries. The breadth doubles as proof — a platform claiming to handle multiple knowledge contexts must show all of them in action. The marketing site reads as comprehensive rather than focused.

Offer pattern: Per-user subscription with feature-tier upsells
Free tier captures small teams; Plus adds collaboration and integrations; Pro adds advanced features and analytics; Enterprise handles procurement and security. The per-user model scales with team adoption rather than with feature consumption, which matches the knowledge-platform usage shape better than usage-metered alternatives.

What's working:
Broader-scope positioning escapes the docs-specialist fight where Mintlify owns the aesthetic.|WYSIWYG editor enables non-developer contributors to author content without learning Markdown or MDX.|Multi-use-case demonstration shows the platform handling public docs, internal wikis, and team knowledge in parallel.|Git-sync option for teams that want docs-as-code workflow while keeping the WYSIWYG editor for collaborators.|Per-user subscription model scales with team adoption predictably without usage-metered complexity.|Long-running platform (founded 2014) with mature feature surface that newer entrants take years to build.

What to adapt:
When a competitor wins narrow specialization, claim a broader scope that the competitor cannot enter without abandoning their identity.|WYSIWYG editing matters when your buyer's contributors include non-developers — the docs-as-code-only positioning loses this segment.|Multi-use-case demonstrations convert when the breadth is real; they confuse when the platform actually specializes despite the marketing claim.

What to avoid:
Do not claim broader scope than you can credibly serve. If your platform is functionally docs-only, the multi-use-case marketing loses trust when buyers discover the depth gap.|Do not abandon docs aesthetics entirely. Even broader-scope platforms need to look good enough that buyers do not reject them on aesthetic grounds.

Brunson lens:
Hook: Broader-scope-than-competitors hook — Brunson 'New Opportunity' move that claims a category the specialist cannot enter.
Story: Multi-Dream-Customer story serving public-docs buyers, internal-wiki buyers, and knowledge-base buyers in parallel.
Offer: Per-user subscription Value Ladder with predictable upgrade tiers — Brunson 'two-step subscription' aligned with team growth.
Value ladder tier: Front-end free tier plus per-user subscription core (Plus, Pro) plus enterprise back-end.