← Back to context

Comment by bobfunk

1 year ago

Netlify CEO here.

Our support team has reached out to the user from the thread to let them know they're not getting charged for this.

It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact.

Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply.

One additional feedback, for consideration: to me, your Pricing page[1] doesn’t make it sufficiently clear that the “Starter” plan may incur costs at all (let alone in this ballpark). It’s now more apparent when looking at it in hindsight, but you have to either read very carefully, or go to the separate “View Features” page to understand this.

“0$ to get started, then pay as you go” reads to me: “0$ to get started, and then you can order add-ons and extra features as you need them”, not “$0 to get started, but we may start charging you virtually unlimited amounts at any point without prior notice”.

When signing up for the “Starter” tier initially, I completely misunderstood this. I didn’t have to enter any credit card or invoice details, so I thought as long as you don’t have that info from me, you can’t and won’t bill anything.

[1]: https://www.netlify.com/pricing/

  • How on earth could I, as a customer, be sure that netlify hadn't paid someone to DDOS me? If I were in charge of a business like that, I would have that thought constantly...

    • Why go through that effort when they could just lie about site usage and say you incurred a bunch of traffic? Or make fake site "hits" from localhost?

      It's really the trade-off for using any cloud host. You are implicitly trusting the host, their monitoring tools, their billing system, and their customer support when things go wrong

      2 replies →

    • This is insane conspiratorial thinking? How would being the only host that happens to get DDOSed constantly be a good business proposition?

      1 reply →

  • > 0$ to get started, then pay as you go” reads to me: “0$ to get started, and then you can order add-ons and extra features as you need them

    I think I disagree with this, but maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

    Pay as you go sounds strongly to me that you pay based on your actual usage, not that it's free except for add-ons. A pay as you go phone, for example, does not imply you need to buy a telephony add-on, an SMS add-on, etc.

    PAYG phones, however, were always prepaid, so I think I would expect PAYG hosting to be similar. That said, if my site was publicly accessible without my prepayment, I think it would be clear that it works the way it apparently does.

    It's potentially misleading, but I don't think it's intentionally dishonest.

    • > you pay based on your actual usage

      The disagreement is on what "usage" means. I wouldn't assume that "usage" includes things that don't take any action on my part.

      If I don't use my phone, for example, I wouldn't get any "usage". A phone pay-as-you-go plan would probably trigger similar outrage if they charged you potentially unlimited amounts for phone calls that hit your voicemail overnight.

      2 replies →

    • > It's potentially misleading, but I don't think it's intentionally dishonest.

      That’s my interpretation as well.

      The usage of the term “add-on” is not clear here in my opinion. On their main pricing page[1], Netlify currently lists “Additional bandwidth” as “Add-on”. To me, that sounds like “I can actively order additional bandwidth in case the included bandwidth isn’t enough.” Not: “Additional bandwidth is automatically allocated and charged for as it happens to occur.”

      In addition to that, there is a big bold “$0” at the top of the “Starter” plan.

      [1]: https://www.netlify.com/pricing/

  • That was my understanding as well, since I signed up for MetLife years ago up until this very moment.

There are only two questions everyone have:

1. Would Netlify forgive the bill if this didn't go viral?

2. How do you plan to address this issue so that it never happens again?

Everyone here knew someone from Netlify would come and say OP wouldn't have to pay. That was a given. Now we want to know the important answers.

  • 1. Yes. We've forgiven lots and lots of bills over the last 9 years and they haven't gone viral

    2. While I've always favored erring towards keeping people's sites up we are currently working on changing the default behavior to never let free sites incur overages

    • Any cloud platform should have a spend-stop amount built in.

      i.e. if I know I average $10 a day, I should be able to put in a "If it hits $50, email me and take it offline".

      Of course the opposite problem is then people setting that limit too low but since the user defines the limit that's on them not you.

      This is one of the reasons I still in 2024 rent physical boxes and run the modern stuff on top of them directly, yes it costs me more per month but the price is hard capped.

      78 replies →

    • If forgiving bills for this kind of a thing is a standard practice, how come this was the customer support's first reaction:

      >We normally discount these kinds of attacks to about 20% of the cost, which would make your new bill $20,900. I've currently reduced it to about 5%, which is $5,225.

      20% and 5% are quite a bit higher than forgiven.

      6 replies →

    • > 1. Yes. We've forgiven lots and lots of bills over the last 9 years and they haven't gone viral

      This isn't what you said in your first post, you said:

      > It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact.

      So forgiving "lots and lots" doesn't move the needle. Do you or do you not forgive _all_ such cases where your DDOS protection doesn't take down the site? What was your employee referring to when saying that the usual discount is 20%? Are you saying that you _never_ discount 20% and instead always discount 100% i.e. "forgive"?

      1 reply →

    • 1. Forgiven many, is Netlify forgiving all obvious anomalies? Is the question, which if so but you said many so it is a no, it would make you reconsider the next point 2. Favoring keeping people site up ? Would you go as far as keeping them up if they stopped paying for the meter? If not you simply should not let that meter go overboard.

      Hey I'm a taxi driver. Hailer fell asleep on the back, so I kept driving all night, once he woke up I dropped him to his place and asked for my monthly wage. I "forgive" many, but just a few are juicy income so I adopted the policy to never wake any customer up. If people ask I say it would be impolite, principles prime.

    • Regarding #2: I would rather have my hobbyist website go down rather than facing the daunting task to raise a query on HN and hope the bill goes away.

    • > 1. Yes. We've forgiven lots and lots of bills over the last 9 years and they haven't gone viral

      Sequence of events doesn't support this answer:

      1. User gets charged 100k

      2. User complains to support

      3. User receives discount to 20k, then 5k. Support states policy is normally 20k

      4. User discloses to the world. Goes viral.

      5. Invoice is forgiven

      While you might forgive "lots and lots", fact is that you still presented the invoice to a free tier customer, and when they complained you gave them a discount, but still charge. Only when it went viral did you forgive it.

      3 replies →

    • Give that there are free stressers/booters , and reasonable prices to rent a DDoS cloud.... https://stresser.su/#pricing

      1. What are you doing to prevent DDoS's from hitting your network?

      2. Why do customers have to allow an unlimited credit burden to use services?

      3. Why arent there cost controls to "if $$ exceeds X, shut acct down"? Azure can do this.

      Long story short, why are you by default (except for social media escalation) passing fraud costs to customers?

    • But you realize that a small business or startup can't rely on "generosity" to avoid going bankrupt?

      It seems that significant bills appearing without warning or cut-offs is clearly intentional. I am embarrassed that I recommended Netlify before.

    • Do the changes you are working on that will cause "the default behavior to never let free sites incur overages" involve providing users with spending limit controls?

      Solving this only for the free site use case doesn't address the core problem that people are bringing up about a lack of spending limit controls.

    • Do we have anything more binding than your word to rely on?

      From what I see you could change this policy tomorrow unilaterally and we would have no recourse.

      1 reply →

    • Why did this happen in this case if you said it doesn't? Netlify fought to bill OP repeatedly until it went viral.

    • > 1. Yes. We've forgiven lots and lots of bills over the last 9 years and they haven't gone viral

      No offence, but this sounds like "trust me bro" billing and it is not good enough. Someone could literally get a heart attack from getting $100,000 bill - this amount of debt can literally ruin someone financially.

      > 2. While I've always favored erring towards keeping people's sites up we are currently working on changing the default behavior to never let free sites incur overages

      I hope you understand that chance someone who used to pay you $20 / month unlikely want to ever get $10,000 bill. Yeah people might dislike that their website went down due high traffic, but it's not gonna bring this much negative PR as incidents like this. There should be some sanity check at least.

      1 reply →

    • 2. is obviously what should have always been the case, but it's good news to hear you've now gotten there. Every single hobbyist website would always choose downtime over a hundred thousand dollar charge.

      3 replies →

    • You should probably consider a daily limit (up to some max n days) rather than a hard one time limit. If your engineers can set a 1 and done they can set an n and done and it would be a much better solution and more customer friendly. The guy using 5 gigs today as a poor college student will likely have a position in a small to mid-size company in a few years. I assume non-free (but low tier) customers would much prefer a reasonable limit set as well. Maybe a max of 2x (or so ) bandwidth so no huge surprises. Remember they're your customers and not your paying adversaries

    • I’m sorry. You are working on changing things so FREE sites don’t get charged???

      That’s the elephant in the room here. I understand an enterprise plan where you state billing is $xx per GB, but billing someone with a free site??

      Give me a break.

    • This seems like a really good idea to me. Or at least cap overages at a specified amount, like 2x the free level (a $55 surprise bill is a totally different universe from a $100,000 surprise bill, obviously).

      Honestly, this terrifies me---I run a bunch of different sites off netlify, and I would have never imagined that a site could jump from 0 to six figures of bills a month without something hitting a tripwire somewhere and cutting it off or at least communicating with the account owner. At least users should have the capacity to self-impose bandwidth caps to prevent this sort of thing.

  • Thank God for social media that the user was able to get attention about this on Reddit which he was then advised there to post this on HN. It must have been stressful to see a six-figure bill and then get told that that, no worries, you’d ‘only’ be charged $5k instead for a static site. It’s just ridiculous to me to be sent a 6-figure bill in the first place.

    • I hope this is not one of the cases that get simply forgotten and in a week or two their beginner unfriendly platform gets recommended again without a second thought.

      With models like this and AWS people will get afraid of success

      2 replies →

    • Well, it's still debatable for the history books if social media is a net good.

      Before the internet, these issues would be handled by local news journalism, and still sometimes do!

      1 reply →

  • From the 5% reduction it seems (1) was less likely.

    To bobfunk, the response needs more empathy and explanation around the obvious frustration around why there is no slider for cost limitation.

    As it is, it feels like the minimum viable corpspeak apology and damage control.

  • You don't see VPS providers like Vultr forgiving bills like this, nor do they make the news. Granted they are not the same scope as Netlify, but still.

  • OP said they agreed to reduce the payment, which means they acknowledged it was an attack but still wanted payment

  • if only i had $1 for every time for every time someone asked this exact question on HN. yes, we all get it: easy question is askable and not answerable. you want a gold star?

I’ve been a netlify user since 2017 and I just deleted all my sites. I can’t risk receiving a $100k bill for toy projects. Your “current policy” is not good enough.

  • Same, as it stands you the user are legally liable for the full bill unless netlify graciously forgive it. Even in op's case, they didn't (still charging 5k!).

    If there was an option to cap billing, or at least some legally binding limit on liability, then I can countenance using netlify.

    Until then, it's just not feasible nor worth the risk.

  • Same boat here.

    the fact that once it arrives to the limits does not display an error page.

    At this point I honestly do not care about they changing their policy, they should have thought that a normal person receiving a 100000$ bill on a free tier shall not been at all on the table in any circumstance, even if they forgive the bill, nobody needs to stress out like that.

  • Same. I will (almost certainly) never incur a $104k bill, but switching to Cloudfare Pages looks free and I don't want to depend on unwritten policies of goodwill to mitigate the potential risk.

  • Same here. Will I ever get a level of traffic that would cause this problem? Extremely doubtful. Is it worth the risk when Cloudflare Pages is a similarly easy offering, and took 5 minutes to switch to? Hell no.

  • Starting to wonder if this whole thing was an elaborate ploy by Netlify to cull the herd of longstanding, non-paying accounts.

  • Same. Toy project and it’s not worth the risk of using netlify. What’s a good, simple alternative for a VueJS app?

    • > What’s a good, simple alternative for a VueJS app?

      I'm not sure about VueJS specifically, but I run everything I can off a $6/m digital ocean droplet (static sites, web apps, git repos, RDBMS, some other custom apps I've written) and it hasn't broken a sweat yet[1].

      My understanding used to be that requests will be dropped if my virtual server can't handle it, and I'll have to transfer 10,000TB to get to a $100,000 bill.

      In practice, my server will not physically handle the load to serve more than maybe $1000 of data a month; it will fall over before that.

      In summary, using a VPS is sorta like an instant hard cap.

      [1] Until I tried using Jenkins. Which crashed constantly because apparently 512GB of RAM is too little for what it does. I'm now in the process of writing my own little CD tool that isn't going to go over 30MB of RAM just to run my deployment scripts.

      3 replies →

    • Cloudflare pages is pretty much drop in for netlify. And it has unlimited bandwidth for free (at least in theory. Guess they might call you if your site does 1 petabyte per hour)

  • I agree and also delete my account.

    The only "fix" here is to act like Hetzner and null route upon DDoS, price cap the thing, or offer unlimited bandwidth on the free tier like e.g. Cloudflare Pages.

    Uncapped but paid is a recipe for disaster and you'll always be subject to the will of the support staff when something happens. If they can grasp to a straw leading to suspicions that it's not in fact a DDoS attack, you can for example be sure they'll do just that. Just no.

    • How does price caps work on Hetzner? I never managed to figure that out from reading their price lists. It looks to me like they charge for each TB, and the only thing I can see is that you can set an email alert to go off when close to some threshold?

      1 reply →

  • Couldn't have worded it any better.

    I did the same last night from my phone. My personal site and a project docs site are just going to not be online for a couple days. Easy choice.

  • Same. I'm looking at alternatives to get off netlify ASAP.

  • Did exactly the same, moving everything over to Cloudflare took me less than 15 minutes. “We’ll forgive those cases, pinky swear” is not a valid excuse when putting (even opt-in) hard limits in place is technically viable.

"Current policy?" So, you will retain a right to change such fees when you feel like it.

This is a serious matter. We are building a new site for our company with Netlify, but we can't open ourselves to this predatory practice. And even if you do not mean to be predatory, even the option of such is enough.

If not resolved with a clean, legally binding promise, our company (and probably quite a few others) must move our business to Cloudflare, Amazon, or some other competitor of yours.

  • Presumably your company’s site won’t be on their limited free tier.

    • The paid tier (like $19/mo/user) has the same vulnerability. Overages are charged at the same price per GB as the free tier and they could still be charged $100k for the exact same thing.

  • > "Current policy?" So, you will retain a right to change such fees when you feel like it.

    Is that unreasonable?

  • Why are you asking this question here? Any actual company would have reviewed all the legal documents prior to choosing a provider. The promises you seek are the exact reason "enterprise-grade" providers can (and do) charge so much.

    edit: hey guess what, Netlify offers an enterprise plan, I'd bet they will be happy to offer you a "clean, legally binding promise": https://www.netlify.com/pricing/?category=enterprise

« Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply. »

"Didn't come through" doesn't actually match the user's report of having support explicitly offering 20% and then 5% payment. It sounds like maybe you have a training problem? That seems like one of the important points to speak to.

> It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact.

That doesn't square with the 5% fee on the original $104k that your company told the OP to then pay.

> It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact.

Well, giving the option to users to plan ahead would be best, no? Like a setting to choose whether they want a potentially unlimited bill versus downtime. Instead of that, you are choosing to stress and make people scared/anxious/homeless even (if they don't think of raising the issue on HN).

Seriously, this is not rocket science. This must have been discussed before in your company, and someone actually made this decision to stress people about such bills.

  • Frankly the only reason I can even come up with that Netlify wouldn't have such controls in place is exactly if they do _not_ simply forgive these sorts of jumps in costs (as the CEO here seems to be claiming). I'm pretty sure if they'd be left holding the bag, they'd manage to find some way to cut off these kinds of jumps in usage.

    • Maybe it’s a tax dodge! “Forgive” 100k of “overages” which cost Netlify next to nothing, then report it as a write off on taxes.

      5 replies →

    • Well, note that they're only talking about giving refunds if there's an attack and they miss it. Doesn't mean they'll give a refund if you get $100K worth of real user traffic.

> It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact.

The legitimate mistake sounds to be on _your_ side if anything. You failed to match the attack pattern after all.

> Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply.

The support email said you normally discount the attacks to 20%, but in this case it would be discounted to 5%. Are you here publicly claiming that your policy is to in fact to forgive (i.e. discount 100%) these bills? Was the support reply totally incorrect in claiming that you normally discount the attacks to 20% or are you lying when saying that your policy is to forgive the bills? You might want to clarify your position here.

How does a 60 TB in a day peak for a site that previously never crossed the free tier threshhold not qualify as "attack pattern"?

This is a static site. To reach that sort of bandwidth out of nowhere you'd need to publish the blueprint for a teleportation machine

  • To be fair, these days, things can become viral literally overnight.

    That said, instead of depending on unreliable heuristics, they should just allow an option to change the behavior. The "current policy" to charge small sites on the free tier thousands of dollars instead of just throttling/shutting down the traffic is really predatory.

    • Most people won't want to fork over $100k to support a hobby project that's gone viral either.

    • Anyone exceeding their plan with a factor of 10 or hell, let's make it a 100, almost certainly didn't anticipate it and thus isn't prepared for the kind of bill that apparently comes with it (or even knows that there would be a bill). On top of that, there currently is no way to state such rules up front! Moverover, according to their own explanation, it was almost certainly not organic traffic!

      I wager the vast majority of people in the free tier would gladly cap their traffic at the (generous!) bandwidth offered by Netlify. Even to the majority in paid tiers, 100k bills where there previously was none must be unwanted and unintended.

      I mean, we all know dark patterns are a thing...

I understand that you need to pay bills, but auto-billing over the bandwidth budget just isn't OK, or at least not unless the user specifically configures that that's OK. I for sure didn't understand your bandwidth tiers that way.

You can avoid this sort of bad press and disgruntled users and your support cost by just giving users the option to shut down the site once the bandwidth budget is up.

That customers must seek forgiveness at Netlify's discretion is not comforting. What's comforting is dependable spending controls.

Lol this deescalated pretty quickly, went from $104K to $20K to $5K to $0 Which basically means you almost scammed the customer for $5K or $20K. Super negative practices. I for one could never trust a company operating in that manner. It would be much more honest to say "unlimited bandwidth" and set a hard-limit for maximum budget, then people know they won't be charged, than to go through all this crap and then pretend you're doing a favor to the customer (you're not). If I'm normally spending $10/month any idiot out there would know for sure that I'm not going to spend $104K instantly. That's a very basic filter to have. But you don't place such filters because obviously you're working on the principle to scam people many thousands of $ if they fall for that. Heck, for all we know you might send that amount of traffic to your customer and the try to scam them and if it doesn't work then pretend you're doing them a favor.

  • The fact that the CEO had to step in after this blew up online otherwise they were going to try to extort that poor dude for thousands of dollars!

    Moving my sites off of netlify ASAP.

    • Tell you what is a good question, why is this thread on page FIVE of HN (ranked #125) with 1000+ upvotes, 400+ comments and only 7 hours old?

      13 replies →

  • Heck, at that point, why not "send some traffic" to your customer? It's not like they have any way of verifying its source. Hmm... why even send traffic at all? Just add a multiplier to their metrics!

  • This is very weird take. I'm struggling to understand why this is incident as a reflection of "super negative practices" or is somehow a "scam". The CEO came here and publicly apologized for the mistake and mis-communication, and the issue is resolved for the user with no charges. What am I missing?

    • What price would the dude have to pay if he didn't publish it? How often does this happen and why is there no protection against charging free customers 100k out of the blue. Why charge it and shock the customer if practice is to waive it? The CEOs response kinda just made the situation worse.

      2 replies →

    • It's only a weird take if you don't have any common sense. It's super simple: either offer unlimited bandwidth(since you're not charging these anyways), like Cloudflare Pages does, or put in place controls that will allow customer to set a top limit for their budget. You can't just all of a sudden send them a $104K bill and expect them to pay when the've never spent more than a few bucks. And then even worse, you can't pretend to expect them to pay 20%, then 5% then pretend you're doing them a favor by completely liftig it off. That's just arbitrary billing and preying for any victim that would fall and agree to pay 20% or 5% etc. I'm just asking for common sense and practices that build trust, not arbitraty billing rules.

      5 replies →

    • Any person seeing a user that normally has a $0/$10 per month bill suddenly spike to $104K would see that this is obviously a DDoS.

      If it has always been a "policy" to forgive bills, shouldn't it have been 100% forgiven immediately after OP contacted support in the first place? Why go through the trouble of playing the hero by offering "discounts".

    • The user was asked to pay 20% then 5k on a service that's called "free" but has some extras which actually cost money.

      After this the CEO comes along and says that the policy is actually not to bill for this kind of event... But the company actually tried to bill this user 3 times... soo it all stinks really.

You can't rely on such a policy if it is not part of the actual contract. This doesn't address the enormous uncertainty and risk that is present here when using Netlify.

  • This is what sticks out to me about the situation. I would much rather a site go offline due to service overage triggering at some limit that I set - simply relying on the good faith of a host to subjectively waive fees is not reliable nor does it instill confidence that I won't be financially ruined by malicious third parties (like nearly happened here). I would imagine that the good faith of Netlify in this case would mean very little to a court when there is a contract that stipulates costs for services, and the worst case scenario for a user is that Netlify could take the issue to court with the contract the user agreed to and demand full payment. Even the possibility for this situation to occur without any tools existing to prevent it is terrifying and is a terrible value proposition for a service.

So what's the policy?

Do you forgive 100%, 95%, or 80% of the bill?

Is the 100% only available when a story about a bill goes viral?

By the time you forgive the bill you may have caused significant psychological distress, maybe even irreparable. This doesn't feel like a responsible approach.

  • This is the way most companies work unfortunately. Paypal limits your account and makes you wait 6 month to (maybe) give you a way to get the money back.

    • This is why I stopped using PayPal. My credit card company allows me to issue chargebacks with typically very little friction because of my credit history. PayPal once put me through the wringer for an order I cancelled and never received a refund for. After that I deleted my PayPal account and decided to never use it again. In this case, I would take my site off Netlify and never use it again.

I’ve already migrated my two sites off Netlify after reading about this incident, and seeing other replies where folks said they were stuck with large bills.

This large bill doesn’t look like a legitimate mistake, it looks like everything worked as intended until things got escalated via Hacker News.

This leaves all your other small business users potentially on the hook and at the mercy of your mercy.

Not only should this stuff be capped rather than the dam allowed to flow, but your systems should have picked this up immediately and known it for its nature.

Thus must have been a nice little earner for you over the years.

I'm moving all my netlify sites elsewhere, bob.

I'm probably not the only one.

Can you respond to the allegations that Netlify has inadequate spending limit controls? Are there plans to improve this situation?

> traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns

I interpret this as "we always charge for traffic served, but we attempt to block illegitimate traffic" which means of course that the worse their traffic discriminator performs, the more money they make!

Hello bobfunk, thank you for acting on this.

One question though, what is Netlify gonna do to ensure this doesn't happen again?

I understand it's a hairy question, but the general consensus seems to be some policy must be changed or at least some line should be drawn.

Made an account here to also let you know, I too am removing my websites from netlify ASAP. Thank you for bringing this to light.

How long has this been the "current" policy? 2 hours?

  • ex employee here, left 4 years ago. was policy back then too.

    • So the original support worker just pulled 20% (and then 5%) out of thin air? Given your internal knowledge, can you maybe explain why a support worker would ever do that if policy is simply to forgive the debt?

So this one got attention due to some good Samaritan on Reddit who told OP to post here. Now, to the real question here: have others not received as good advice and just paid up?

> instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact

That's terrible for marketing.

I'm moving my domain name and personal site off Netlify (already deleted the sites, DNS transfer requested), probably moving to Cloudflare pages.

It may only move a few MB a month, but I just can't risk if I put anything more substantial there that I might get hit with a bill for $100k and you maybe will forgive it. And that this has apparently been policy for nearly a decade makes it even worse.

I'm so grateful that Cloudflare has Pages, and I was able to move my hosting needs there. Netlify has been expensive for a while now.

Sorry, but there is a lot more going on here than you addressed, these charges were incurred on your "starter tier", which has no mention of additional costs.. I've noticed a lot of "sponsored content" by netlify, and again no mention of this possibility.. Also, no comment on not having ddos protection, or at least a spend limit?

Sure, this instance was resolved, but it's also the top post of the last month. Who honestly things it would be the same outcome if not for going viral...

I’ve been a Netlify users on the Pro plan for a few years now. Moving from Netlify to CloudFlare after this; “this didn’t come through in the initial support reply” doesn’t cut it for a $100k bill.

But you do see how _not_ addressing this in the initial support reply is going to cost you all in the long term, right? The real lesson here seems to be for small projects, it may well be worth the investment to handle my own hosting. All I see here is that getting you to do the right thing required publicly shaming you, which means you can be trusted about as far as I can throw a piano.

How about a button that says "put down my website if it suddenly starts getting charged"?.

Never used "netlify", but to me a product is broken if you are using the words free and bill together.

I wont touch a fake free service if it requires a payment method. Want my money, give me a reason to pay you, dont trick me into paying you.

Temped to go fuzz your product and document other dark patterns...

So netlify is a major scammer organization now!? Uh oh time to look elsewhere

I’d rather be shut down than have a heart attack from a $100k bill. That could literally kill me from stress, even if you pinky swear to refund any oopsies.

  • See the Robinhood user who committed suicide after misunderstanding his liabilities from selling options.

You should rethink this policy. Someone could panic and do something unthinkable, then you'd wish bad press was the only thing on your conscious.

Is the support employee going to be fired for making such a traumatizing mistake? Or was 5% ok until this went viral?

That is an outrageous and inhumane policy. People get panic attacks when they get told they owe 100k they don’t have. People will be terrified your internal process wrongly determines the bill is legitimate. Imagine you have to study for an important exam or that you have a paper due. How can you possibly focus with this nightmare at your doorstep?

Truly shameful.

This is predatory and you know it.

Your support was going to charge him 5% as a "sign of good fate". How kind.

If it hadn't gotten traction, you absolutely would have charged him.

How many other people have you strong armed into paying ridiculous bills?

The fact that you have no usage limits is clear indication that this is intentionally left open to abuse.

Extremely shady and downright criminal.