←back to thread

231 points ryanvogel | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.303s | source
Show context
andreybaskov ◴[] No.45767664[source]
I'm surprised so many replies here are about removing a free tier 2 years ago. Things cost money, what did you expect? Whenever I get free products that cost money I expect it's either temporary, or I'm being the product myself.
replies(7): >>45767789 #>>45768354 #>>45768911 #>>45769081 #>>45769220 #>>45769633 #>>45770466 #
andrenotgiant ◴[] No.45767789[source]
didn't help that they called it "Free forever" before taking it away. Lesson learned
replies(4): >>45767902 #>>45767937 #>>45768516 #>>45769058 #
1. eskibars ◴[] No.45769058[source]
So as some of my own feelings/thoughts on this: I've also sat on the "receiving side" of a "free forever" campaign now 2 times in my career. The first time driven by the CEO and the second time driven by the marketing team (and supported by the CEO). In both cases, I knew the truth (sitting on the product management side) that there was no sustainable way to have a "free forever" campaign: that there was finite end in both cases on the 2-5 year horizon before we needed to change plans. I advocated against adding the "forever" verbiage knowing this. The first time, I didn't push strongly: it was my mistake.

The second time, I pushed strongly and made sure the entire executive team knew that we would be misleading our users. I pointed to the horizon and talked about the problems with "forever" language. I had to push very strongly back on the marketing team to change verbiage and then they silently made updates anyway to add "forever" verbiage. They were eventually fired for this.

But what I find concerning here isn't that the "free" tier went away (it almost always must) but that there's denial and push-back in this set of threads about the verbiage. You made a mistake. Own it and apologize for the verbiage you put out there. Don't deny that it was ever there or argue over pedantic details about where/how that verbiage was placed.