←back to thread

466 points blacktechnology | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
dotty- ◴[] No.41834073[source]
The pricing is very interesting. The company I work for pays $20k for Jira & Confluence and $20k for Slack every year. And this platform claims I can replace both of them for $3600/year? and it's open source? The marketing looks great, so I hope the platform is actually a good competitor. I'd be so curious to see what their revenue is every year.
replies(1): >>41834109 #
danpalmer ◴[] No.41834109[source]
Basecamp is also the same price. SaaS pricing is all made up. If you're a high-margin SaaS company the idea of spending $40k/yr for this seems... fine. If you're a small business, or you operate on retail margins, you'd laugh them out of the room, and rightly so as there are great tools at far better prices.

The idea of every service charging $15-30 per user per month is a myth perpetuated by companies who themselves have that budget to spend out of their VC funding.

replies(4): >>41834527 #>>41834597 #>>41834661 #>>41836402 #
1. prmoustache ◴[] No.41836402[source]
SaaS pricing is based on how captive the customers can be.

I am not a fan of Atlassian products, but what retains them the most aren't the qualities of the products themselves nowadays, but the integration and plugin ecosystem + the difficulty of exporting the data. Nearly every tool has an integration for either jira, bitbucket, confluence, or all of them. And you would usually dismiss any tool that doesn't have them if you are an Atlassian customer already. Once you have set that up but decide you are paying too much for it, good luck good luck telling your users they will surely lose data/formatting/integrations when migrating to some other tool. This + having to train people to use another tool while companies usually take for granted that their users won't get lost in Jira (which really isn't true).

Ultimately it becomes more of a tax than a price.