Comment by Dylan16807

8 months ago

> The other thing is you cannot build anything sustainable by depending on the charity of a single company.

This wasn't charity from Slack. They paid for the service, and they can migrate if it's truly necessary.

9 comments

Dylan16807

Reply
eru  8 months ago

The special rate was charity.

  • raphman  8 months ago

    If a special rate that better fits an organization's usage patterns is "charity", then any rate that is not extracting the maximum amount of money from the customer is also "charity", no?

    To some degree, reduced rates for non-profit organization and schools are not offered because large companies want to be nice, but because they want to catch future customers.

    • lelanthran  8 months ago

      > If a special rate that better fits an organization's usage patterns is "charity", then any rate that is not extracting the maximum amount of money from the customer is also "charity", no?

      Maybe, but that's not what happened here. It wasn't "a rate better suited to an organisation's usage patterns", it was, more precisely "A heavily/1% reduced rate."

      No reasonable person can have the expectation that a discount of $195k on a $200k bill is going to continue forever!

      At this discount, it really is charity.

      5 replies →