Ciuca, Berger, and Miclea (2017) and Schulz, Vincent, & Berger (2017) each present a pair of process-focused, systematic case studies, one with good outcome and one with a poorer outcome. These cases were drawn from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of an Online self-help therapy for panic disorder and social anxiety disorder, respectively. In both instances the cases were drawn from the clinician-guided arm of the RCT. This commentary reviews the kind of knowledge emerging from these pairs of case studies from a variety of perspectives, including: the practical advantages of online, clinician-guided treatment; client readiness for treatment; the role of the therapist alliance; the broad reach of online therapy; and the important complementary role that systematic case studies play in enhancing the knowledge that emerges from RCTs.Key words: Online therapy; clinician-guided Online therapy; panic disorder; social anxiety disorder; case studies; clinical case studies; randomized controlled trials; therapeutic alliance ________________________________________________________________________ The systematic case studies by Ciuca, Berger, and Miclea (2017) and by Schulz, Vincent, and Berger (2017) are notable contributions to the growing body of literature in the field of Online treatments. While many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that Online interventions can work for a number of mental problems and disorders, case studies are still rare. Ciuca et al.'s and Schulz et al.'s systematic case studies, which each compare a good outcome and a poorer outcome case, offer several benefits and insights.