I suggest adding a pricing tier between $0 and $50/month. I nearly bounced until I saw you also offer very reasonable usage-based billing. You could just calculate what $5/month of usage-based billing could buy and list it as a tier, but having the lowest tier be $50 sends an incorrect signal that this isn't for hobbyists.
That's good feedback. We'll update the pricing page accordingly when the time comes. Question: do you worry about usage based billing with respect to surprise charges? Or do you expect a way to limit this?
Both. IMO you should have a plan where the user pays e.g. $7 and when the resources for it are drained, you start refusing requests until the throttle period expires.
It's extremely useful to prototype and experiment with a project and have it have a total budget that will not be surpassed.
One more idea: pay as you go. I pay $10, that turns out to be not enough, I pay another $20 and get immediately unblocked.
Makes sense. We're going to do #1 for sure. #2 is more difficult because we have to be cognizant of or internal costs. But will share with the team nonetheless. Thank you.
No, I'm perfectly happy with usage-based billing. But when I see the cheapest option costing $50 my heuristic is that there probably isn't an affordable other option. I was on mobile, so the usage-based section was below the fold.
Limiting would be ideal, but all I was suggesting is that you indicate above the fold that you have cheaper options
