Comment by victor96
3 years ago
Awesome, let us know your thoughts/feedback!
We have ideas to increase the capability of readers to make edit suggestions, that can be accepted by an editor. This way you can have some of the more junior team members included in the reader count.
How would this sound for you?
That's a good start!
Ultimately, I'm not just not sure what the right billing model here is. Obviously, I want to pay a "reasonable amount", but I understand you need that model to have some kind of payment floor. :)
Some major components of usage/pricing that I can think of:
- Domain Owners - some users will be subject matter experts or DRIs that have ownership over parts of the overall model. These are more likely to be editors, but even other engineers may have small tweaks (edit suggestions) for a domain someone owns
- Any given engineering user will probably not be editing for the vast majority of the time. This + your existing pricing model + edit suggestions would lead to "editors" functioning more as just "approvers". It pushes an org to have a handful of approvers and the rest of their users as commenters.
- high price anchoring - $40/user/month sounds like a lot, even if it's for only a few users. It's also a more complicated user model that makes it more difficult to integrate into IT organizations. It is easier to integrate all users uniformly at a lower price per seat. And if I have 10 people on my team, $4/user/month is the same as having one editor but far more palatable (to me).
Thanks, great points. Especially the last one about it being difficult for an org to figure out who should be editors/readers/etc. It's definitely a challenge for us that we'll need to think more about.