If this category mostly fits your needs with Coda, please provide feedback here.
I was just thinking today of suggesting you a “Solo” (or “Duo”) tier, with 1 maker (or +1 editor).
In the very least — it will have no rows # / objects limit in the free tier.
In the very most — it will have all Team features for free, but no doc viewers or very limited number of consecutive doc viewers.
Target audience: personal trackers for e.g. life goals, smart grocery lists, budget etc. Duo — so that it could be shared with a significant other.
Also target audience: people who are just familiarizing with Coda. Let them have no limits in what they can build while learning. Then start charging only when they’re taking this doc to e.g. their team.
In a nutshell, Coda should offer an opportunity for soloists to learn and use Coda freely, at least in non-commercial scenarios. This could be subsidized by charging large businesses (e.g. Uber, Spotify) more, something they can easily manage.
That’s me. Full disclosure, I’ve already spoken with some Codans about this, but wanted to throw my hat in regardless. I feel like the pricing structure for someone like me doesn’t make a ton of sense. I use 2 docs actively, and 1 as a reference (essentially, last year’s version). It’s the same price as I’d get the following services:
Google Drive - 2tb of data
Dropbox - 2tb of data
Netflix - basic plan
Wordpress - premium (for freelancers)
G Suite - basic ($6)
I realize it’s apples to oranges, but for me I would have to figure out what the value is for <5 docs vs., say, my own email address, digital entertainment, or a hosted WP site.
In my opinion, it’s ok to limit the free tier, but the limit should be higher, something like 3,000 “elements” - an element should be either a row or one of the other objects (table, view, button, etc.). The free tier should also have the gmail and calendar packs but without doc protection and cross-doc pack. This will allow users to get to know coda and build functional docs and encourage them to upgrade if they find it useful enough, given a reasonable price for the first paid tier, that should be the:
“solo” (or even better - the “duo”, as @Paul_Danyliuk suggested) which I think is one of the most popular use cases - for personal/household management:
The solo/duo tier should have the same options as the free tier but with no size limit, it should be limited for one maker - or one maker and one editor for duo (it might be shared as view only)
I think 4$ per month is a reasonable price, or maybe 4$ for solo and 5$ for duo…
I agree with this and that’s why I think that limiting the free tier could be done differently than by using what’s currently on the canva of a doc.
Learning how to use Coda is not that easy (so many things can be done with Coda in a lot of different ways, which means Coda can attract a lot of different persons for a lot of different reasons)
I personally had a little bit of luck, coming from elsewhere, but I’m still considering myself as a newbie as I’m still learning news things about Coda everyday (which is fun by the way )
I feel that limiting differently the free tier could be more engaging and convincing.
I love coda and am still experimenting with it and all it’s features. I have one main doc that I use to manage my workload and use constantly but I am the only user.
With the new pricing model I would have to pay $30 a month to keep using the doc I have spent nearly a year creating, refining and experimenting with which is just far to expensive for essentially a (albeit Super cool!) task manager just to keep the new cross doc functionality I have built in.
I understand a simple tiered pricing model is a good way to go especially when focussed at teams but the experimenters making apps and being creative with coda will be lost.
For me, a model where I pay per month per feature would be far better. Building block pricing model so I can select the features I want such as a cost per integration or add on cross docs for x amount, add on an extra storage amount or increase the number of automations as and when needed would better suits my needs. The functionality available to everyone not just some aimed at teams.
Don’t think I can revise my doc and workflow process down to fit the free tier so looking at how I can transition what I can of my doc to notion instead. A real shame as I love coda but not suited too anything to complex as an individual using it to build.
I hope the model works out for them as they do deserve to get payback on an excellent product they have created.
I fit this category 100%. Question for Codans and users alike:
A lot of people are advocating for increased size limits for the free tier. But does anyone else think that actually more limitations (ie. reduced size limits) is a good idea? More limits on the free tier and a cheaper solo tier ($4/mo. range) would be an attractive offer to me.
To lessen the sting of more limits and to make sure the non-paying public can discover the benefit of Coda, offer free users editor-access to templates. Eventually free users will want to customize their docs, use cross-doc or packs, and the choice to pay a little bit more will not be daunting.
Love Coda. I’ve put a chunk of my life into it–a chunk that nobody but me needs to see. I’d be happy to pay a subscription of maybe $40/year for a workspace with one document/no size limits/limited packs. Cross-doc obviously wouldn’t be relevant, but it’d be nice to have the Google products. No size limits is necessary because I’m tracking a lot of data, the more–>the more valuable.
OK, I wouldn’t be “happy,” because I hate subscriptions. But I think it would be fair.
@Paul_Danyliuk I’ve been working with quite a few pricing experts over the years and I think you read the pricing models vs user cases vs product usability far better than Coda’s pricing advisors (sorry Codans but for me you got it quite wrong with these pricing models).
Obviously the free tier as its now would have very limited practicals user cases. I reach 1000 lines only with the schedule for my family until next year… It seems you offered it just for the marketing and to keep your promise to always have a free tier.
Don’t need to repeat what’s already been suggested for free. Will add a perspective. I just want to remind that free is not exactly free when one spends the most expensive currency - their time to build a doc or contribute to the development of Coda.
I’m personally not against limitations on the free tier or even more limitations… I’m against the way it’s actually done.
Because, there’s at least one case scenario most of early users has been confronted to these past few days which is bothering me because the free tier is there for anyone to use it (not only new users discovering Coda) :
What if for some reasons you need to urgently downgrade to a free workspace ?
What will happened to all the docs I’ve spent hours to build while paying ?
What if I want/can upgrade again ?
In it’s actual state, the free tier doesn’t permit that (well, there’s at least a lot of “unknown” there)…
Which means that once you begin to pay and create bigger docs, there’s no “safeguard”.
Paying users could feel “trapped” in their tiers.
Which is far less engaging for re-upgrading later.
I’ve already talked to the pricing team about that too and made other suggestions .
I don’t know what will happened there, but I felt listened to, so I’ll wait n’ see .
Thank you all for continuing to share your thoughts here. These are all good points and valid concerns.
I’m lucky enough to have most my docs under the company I work for, but I definitely see myself using it more actively as a soloist as well, and for that I do think the price model is too much. That was also the direct feedback I got when I recommended coda to someone: https://twitter.com/R0MMSEN/status/1191292861079326720
Like others, I’ve already voiced my concerns about the limitations on the “Pro” tier. I love the Soloist designation and it fits me pretty closely. So don’t discriminate against me just because I’m not on a team.
Here’s one reason I think limits on Cross-Docs, Packs and Automations makes life difficult for the soloist who has invested a lot of time building out solutions in Coda:
For the life of me, I just can’t see why the pricing schedule couldn’t be simplified. Give ALL Makers – team or solo – the same maker-powers (Packs, Automations and Cross Docs). Charge a base price for Teams because of the sharing, admin and permissions powers and a per seat price for each maker on the team.
As others have noted, Coda’s awesomeness is going to incent a lot of team editors or users to eventually become makers. You could make this easier for the CFO to swallow if the cost for more makers declines on a per-seat basis.
Simple pricing structure
Free – limit the number and size of docs you can be a maker on (maybe 5, with 5000 elements?) to give new users a full taste of Coda’s greatness.
Maker – all maker-powers, unlimited docs and doc sizes.
Teams – Base price for sharing, admin and permissions powers, plus per Maker rate.