Okay that worked, thanks for the link and outline of the update.
This is definitely a step in the right direction, and as your team is listening and following through with looking into this, I feel that it’s important to keep providing feedback on this. Your consideration of the issue is very much appreciated.
Our reply to this would be that none of our sites require any of the other features of the Elite plan, other than the CMS quotas. I would say that’s the case for the majority of sites that use moderate amounts of data too. This means that for any of our clients that want more than 10K items, which is very small once you involve even just their customer lists etc., then we need to tell them that their annual billing will change from ~$500 to a huge jump of ~$1800. That’s a hard sell and not one we want to push on them.
And then, that still only gets them up to 100K items! So even if you reduced the price, it’s still a pretty harsh price hike to just keep their site the same.
So, our suggestion is to mirror database platforms like MongoDB’s Pricing. In this example, we would pay for our best fitting plan, then a payment for how much data is actually used. This makes far more sense as then sites can keep scaling infinitely and you’ll keep getting paid more as they scale - everybody wins.
Or, if you really don’t want to move to that model, please focus less on price adjustments and more on CMS limits. Ideally scrapped altogether as it is right now (which has worked perfectly well for years) or by increasing the cap by at least 10X on all tiers. Scrapping the read/write limits as suggested is also still needed.
I hope you’re able to relay this feedback on this latest update. Thank you for listening to us and I hope we can keep this dialogue going.