Interstitial Upgrade Page
Philo’s monetization got messy fast.
I built a system that made upgrades clear, consistent, and scalable.
Fixing the Jarring Transition from FAST to Premium
The problem wasn't the paywall. It was everything that happened before it.
Philo's unified experience work revealed a specific friction point that users hit constantly. They'd be browsing FAST content, click on something that looked interesting, and suddenly land on a premium show page or channel page with zero context about why they were there or what they were supposed to do. The internal docs called it "jarring." That's exactly what it was.
I designed an interstitial upgrade page that showed value before gating, created clear upgrade moments, and laid the groundwork for our Reverse Trial model.
When the Product Outpaces the User's Mental Model
The issue showed up everywhere. Click a show in the guide, land on a premium show page. Click a channel in All Channels, suddenly you're looking at subscription content. Follow a deep link from marketing, arrive in a premium context with no explanation.
In every case, the experience felt broken because the behavior didn't match the expectation.
The root cause was simple: Philo had built these surfaces for paying users who already understood the product structure. Which channels were free, which required a subscription, what the difference even meant. But now uncredentialed FAST users were accessing the same URLs. Same UI, different user state, completely different needs.
A paying user wants quick access to their content. A FAST user needs context about what they're looking at and why they should care.
We were also hitting users with dual paywalls in some flows. One paywall before entering account info, then a different updated paywall after creating the account. This wasn't intentional design. It was the accumulated result of different teams building different surfaces at different times without a unified model for how gating should work.
The Hypothesis
We believed that introducing an interstitial page, a clear upgrade moment between FAST and premium surfaces, would reduce the jarring transition by showing users what they were about to see and why it was valuable.
The key insight: users need context before they need access. If we communicate value first, the gate doesn't feel like an interruption. It feels like a natural decision point.
Dynamic vs. Generic: The Content Question
One critical decision was whether to make the interstitial content dynamic, showing the specific show or channel the user clicked on, or generic, showing a curated collection of premium highlights.
Dynamic content felt more personal and directly relevant. If they clicked on a specific show, seeing that show's imagery reinforced that they were in the right place and just needed to unlock it.
But dynamic content had risks. What if the show they clicked wasn't particularly compelling in isolation? What if the channel had weaker content than other premium options? Generic content gave us more control, we could always showcase our strongest offerings. But it risked feeling disconnected from what the user actually wanted.
We decided to test both. For shows with strong recognition and appeal, we'd use dynamic content to capitalize on existing interest. For channels with varied quality or less distinctive content, we'd use generic premium highlights. This gave us flexibility to optimize for conversion based on what the data showed actually worked.
Building Value-First Gating
The interstitial pages became one of the first production validations of the unified experience framework. They required us to implement the value-first gating logic we'd designed: users should see what they're getting before we ask them to pay for it. This was a departure from traditional paywall patterns that gate first and explain later.
Implementing these pages also forced us to rationalize our gating moments. We had to decide which surfaces should trigger the interstitial and which should allow direct access. This wasn't arbitrary. It was based on the unified state model. FAST users could browse freely, but when they attempted to access premium content, that became an intentional upgrade moment rather than an accidental collision.
The interstitial pages also laid the foundation for Reverse Trial. Once we could show users premium value clearly and let them experience it contextually, we had the building blocks for a trial model that inverted the traditional approach. Instead of gating everything and making users imagine the value, we could show them everything and let them experience it directly before asking them to subscribe.
What We Learned
Context is everything in upgrade moments. Users don't mind being asked to pay. They mind being confused about what they're paying for and why. The interstitial pages gave us a way to communicate value at exactly the moment users needed that information. Instead of hitting a wall, they hit a clear decision point.
Dynamic content generally outperformed generic content when the underlying content was strong. Users who clicked on a popular show wanted to see that show's imagery and description. But for weaker content or unfamiliar channels, generic premium highlights worked better because they demonstrated breadth of value rather than focusing on one potentially underwhelming example.
The dual paywall problem disappeared once we implemented the interstitial approach. By showing value first in a consistent format, we didn't need a second paywall after account creation. The decision point was clear before users committed to entering their information. This simplified the flow and eliminated the jarring experience the original documentation had called out.
How I Think About This Work
This wasn't about making prettier paywalls. It was about creating coherent transitions that matched user mental models and provided context when users needed it most.
I also think about how individual solutions connect to larger systems. The interstitial pages weren't a standalone feature. They were an implementation of the unified experience principles. They proved that value-first gating could work in production, and they created the foundation for more ambitious products like Reverse Trial.
Every solution I design is designed to enable the next solution.
The Bottom Line
The jarring transition from FAST to Core wasn't a visual design problem. It was an architecture problem. Users were hitting premium surfaces without context, creating confusion instead of desire. The interstitial upgrade pages fixed that by showing value first, creating clear upgrade moments, and establishing the value-first gating logic that became foundational to everything we built afterward.
This is how I approach UX problems: not as isolated issues, but as symptoms of larger system needs. Fix the system, and the symptoms resolve themselves.
Built in Figma Sites (Beta)
© Selected Works / Tay Williams
2018—2026
Interstitial Upgrade Page
Philo’s monetization got messy fast.
I built a system that made upgrades clear, consistent, and scalable.
Fixing the Jarring Transition from FAST to Premium
The problem wasn't the paywall. It was everything that happened before it.
Philo's unified experience work revealed a specific friction point that users hit constantly. They'd be browsing FAST content, click on something that looked interesting, and suddenly land on a premium show page or channel page with zero context about why they were there or what they were supposed to do. The internal docs called it "jarring." That's exactly what it was.
I designed an interstitial upgrade page that showed value before gating, created clear upgrade moments, and laid the groundwork for our Reverse Trial model.
When the Product Outpaces the User's Mental Model
The issue showed up everywhere. Click a show in the guide, land on a premium show page. Click a channel in All Channels, suddenly you're looking at subscription content. Follow a deep link from marketing, arrive in a premium context with no explanation.
In every case, the experience felt broken because the behavior didn't match the expectation.
The root cause was simple: Philo had built these surfaces for paying users who already understood the product structure. Which channels were free, which required a subscription, what the difference even meant. But now uncredentialed FAST users were accessing the same URLs. Same UI, different user state, completely different needs.
A paying user wants quick access to their content. A FAST user needs context about what they're looking at and why they should care.
We were also hitting users with dual paywalls in some flows. One paywall before entering account info, then a different updated paywall after creating the account. This wasn't intentional design. It was the accumulated result of different teams building different surfaces at different times without a unified model for how gating should work.
The Hypothesis
We believed that introducing an interstitial page, a clear upgrade moment between FAST and premium surfaces, would reduce the jarring transition by showing users what they were about to see and why it was valuable.
The key insight: users need context before they need access. If we communicate value first, the gate doesn't feel like an interruption. It feels like a natural decision point.
Dynamic vs. Generic: The Content Question
One critical decision was whether to make the interstitial content dynamic, showing the specific show or channel the user clicked on, or generic, showing a curated collection of premium highlights.
Dynamic content felt more personal and directly relevant. If they clicked on a specific show, seeing that show's imagery reinforced that they were in the right place and just needed to unlock it.
But dynamic content had risks. What if the show they clicked wasn't particularly compelling in isolation? What if the channel had weaker content than other premium options? Generic content gave us more control, we could always showcase our strongest offerings. But it risked feeling disconnected from what the user actually wanted.
We decided to test both. For shows with strong recognition and appeal, we'd use dynamic content to capitalize on existing interest. For channels with varied quality or less distinctive content, we'd use generic premium highlights. This gave us flexibility to optimize for conversion based on what the data showed actually worked.
Building Value-First Gating
The interstitial pages became one of the first production validations of the unified experience framework. They required us to implement the value-first gating logic we'd designed: users should see what they're getting before we ask them to pay for it. This was a departure from traditional paywall patterns that gate first and explain later.
Implementing these pages also forced us to rationalize our gating moments. We had to decide which surfaces should trigger the interstitial and which should allow direct access. This wasn't arbitrary. It was based on the unified state model. FAST users could browse freely, but when they attempted to access premium content, that became an intentional upgrade moment rather than an accidental collision.
The interstitial pages also laid the foundation for Reverse Trial. Once we could show users premium value clearly and let them experience it contextually, we had the building blocks for a trial model that inverted the traditional approach. Instead of gating everything and making users imagine the value, we could show them everything and let them experience it directly before asking them to subscribe.
What We Learned
Context is everything in upgrade moments. Users don't mind being asked to pay. They mind being confused about what they're paying for and why. The interstitial pages gave us a way to communicate value at exactly the moment users needed that information. Instead of hitting a wall, they hit a clear decision point.
Dynamic content generally outperformed generic content when the underlying content was strong. Users who clicked on a popular show wanted to see that show's imagery and description. But for weaker content or unfamiliar channels, generic premium highlights worked better because they demonstrated breadth of value rather than focusing on one potentially underwhelming example.
The dual paywall problem disappeared once we implemented the interstitial approach. By showing value first in a consistent format, we didn't need a second paywall after account creation. The decision point was clear before users committed to entering their information. This simplified the flow and eliminated the jarring experience the original documentation had called out.
How I Think About This Work
This wasn't about making prettier paywalls. It was about creating coherent transitions that matched user mental models and provided context when users needed it most.
I also think about how individual solutions connect to larger systems. The interstitial pages weren't a standalone feature. They were an implementation of the unified experience principles. They proved that value-first gating could work in production, and they created the foundation for more ambitious products like Reverse Trial.
Every solution I design is designed to enable the next solution.
The Bottom Line
The jarring transition from FAST to Core wasn't a visual design problem. It was an architecture problem. Users were hitting premium surfaces without context, creating confusion instead of desire. The interstitial upgrade pages fixed that by showing value first, creating clear upgrade moments, and establishing the value-first gating logic that became foundational to everything we built afterward.
This is how I approach UX problems: not as isolated issues, but as symptoms of larger system needs. Fix the system, and the symptoms resolve themselves.
Built in Figma Sites (Beta)
© Selected Works / Tay Williams
2018—2026
Interstitial Upgrade Page
Philo’s monetization got messy fast.
I built a system that made upgrades clear, consistent, and scalable.
Fixing the Jarring Transition from FAST to Premium
The problem wasn't the paywall. It was everything that happened before it.
Philo's unified experience work revealed a specific friction point that users hit constantly. They'd be browsing FAST content, click on something that looked interesting, and suddenly land on a premium show page or channel page with zero context about why they were there or what they were supposed to do. The internal docs called it "jarring." That's exactly what it was.
I designed an interstitial upgrade page that showed value before gating, created clear upgrade moments, and laid the groundwork for our Reverse Trial model.
When the Product Outpaces the User's Mental Model
The issue showed up everywhere. Click a show in the guide, land on a premium show page. Click a channel in All Channels, suddenly you're looking at subscription content. Follow a deep link from marketing, arrive in a premium context with no explanation.
In every case, the experience felt broken because the behavior didn't match the expectation.
The root cause was simple: Philo had built these surfaces for paying users who already understood the product structure. Which channels were free, which required a subscription, what the difference even meant. But now uncredentialed FAST users were accessing the same URLs. Same UI, different user state, completely different needs.
A paying user wants quick access to their content. A FAST user needs context about what they're looking at and why they should care.
We were also hitting users with dual paywalls in some flows. One paywall before entering account info, then a different updated paywall after creating the account. This wasn't intentional design. It was the accumulated result of different teams building different surfaces at different times without a unified model for how gating should work.
The Hypothesis
We believed that introducing an interstitial page, a clear upgrade moment between FAST and premium surfaces, would reduce the jarring transition by showing users what they were about to see and why it was valuable.
The key insight: users need context before they need access. If we communicate value first, the gate doesn't feel like an interruption. It feels like a natural decision point.
Dynamic vs. Generic: The Content Question
One critical decision was whether to make the interstitial content dynamic, showing the specific show or channel the user clicked on, or generic, showing a curated collection of premium highlights.
Dynamic content felt more personal and directly relevant. If they clicked on a specific show, seeing that show's imagery reinforced that they were in the right place and just needed to unlock it.
But dynamic content had risks. What if the show they clicked wasn't particularly compelling in isolation? What if the channel had weaker content than other premium options? Generic content gave us more control, we could always showcase our strongest offerings. But it risked feeling disconnected from what the user actually wanted.
We decided to test both. For shows with strong recognition and appeal, we'd use dynamic content to capitalize on existing interest. For channels with varied quality or less distinctive content, we'd use generic premium highlights. This gave us flexibility to optimize for conversion based on what the data showed actually worked.
Building Value-First Gating
The interstitial pages became one of the first production validations of the unified experience framework. They required us to implement the value-first gating logic we'd designed: users should see what they're getting before we ask them to pay for it. This was a departure from traditional paywall patterns that gate first and explain later.
Implementing these pages also forced us to rationalize our gating moments. We had to decide which surfaces should trigger the interstitial and which should allow direct access. This wasn't arbitrary. It was based on the unified state model. FAST users could browse freely, but when they attempted to access premium content, that became an intentional upgrade moment rather than an accidental collision.
The interstitial pages also laid the foundation for Reverse Trial. Once we could show users premium value clearly and let them experience it contextually, we had the building blocks for a trial model that inverted the traditional approach. Instead of gating everything and making users imagine the value, we could show them everything and let them experience it directly before asking them to subscribe.
What We Learned
Context is everything in upgrade moments. Users don't mind being asked to pay. They mind being confused about what they're paying for and why. The interstitial pages gave us a way to communicate value at exactly the moment users needed that information. Instead of hitting a wall, they hit a clear decision point.
Dynamic content generally outperformed generic content when the underlying content was strong. Users who clicked on a popular show wanted to see that show's imagery and description. But for weaker content or unfamiliar channels, generic premium highlights worked better because they demonstrated breadth of value rather than focusing on one potentially underwhelming example.
The dual paywall problem disappeared once we implemented the interstitial approach. By showing value first in a consistent format, we didn't need a second paywall after account creation. The decision point was clear before users committed to entering their information. This simplified the flow and eliminated the jarring experience the original documentation had called out.
How I Think About This Work
This wasn't about making prettier paywalls. It was about creating coherent transitions that matched user mental models and provided context when users needed it most.
I also think about how individual solutions connect to larger systems. The interstitial pages weren't a standalone feature. They were an implementation of the unified experience principles. They proved that value-first gating could work in production, and they created the foundation for more ambitious products like Reverse Trial.
Every solution I design is designed to enable the next solution.
The Bottom Line
The jarring transition from FAST to Core wasn't a visual design problem. It was an architecture problem. Users were hitting premium surfaces without context, creating confusion instead of desire. The interstitial upgrade pages fixed that by showing value first, creating clear upgrade moments, and establishing the value-first gating logic that became foundational to everything we built afterward.
This is how I approach UX problems: not as isolated issues, but as symptoms of larger system needs. Fix the system, and the symptoms resolve themselves.
Built in Figma Sites (Beta)
© Selected Works / Tay Williams
2018—2026