My comment specifically is in response to @Chr1sG:
While a free plan should indeed be generous enough to offer meaningful use, it’s also crucial to strike a balance that supports Fibery’s growth as a business. If the free plan is too generous, it might reduce the incentive for users to upgrade to a paid plan.
The goal of a free plan should be to entice users to explore Fibery deeply enough to recognize its value, without giving so much away that there’s no incentive to upgrade. The key is finding that sweet spot where users get enough to see the potential but still have reasons to transition to a paid plan.
Perhaps @YvetteLans and others could provide input on what limits make sense (my initial suggestions might indeed be too low). However, I’d still lean towards being conservative with free features. From a business perspective, we have to consider: How much value can we provide without undermining Fibery’s growth? What are the most desirable features that we could limit without pushing too many users away? Fibery needs revenue to expand, and free plans can be costly if users don’t see a reason to upgrade because the free tier is too accommodating.
Take Linear’s and Airtable’s pricing page for example:
I think the goal with the free plan is to turn them into a paying customer. And why does a free plan help achieve that? It allows the user to build real scenarios around their use case and confirm it’s the right fit. If you’re looking at different use cases, how many entities would that specific use case likely utilize on a paid plan? At what point do they feel the need to upgrade, if they started on a free plan? Since there are so many uses cases, you should likely find a reasonable limit that works for many use cases. Say, a product team has 1000 issues. They aren’t going to move to Fibery straightaway, they’re going to test it. If it seems to work well for their needs, they’ll import their items once they have determined the Fibery structure. If they have a small amount and your limits are too generous, then they’ll never need to upgrade to begin with, unless their is a feature they want that is limited or blocked. How much freedom do they need to get the most out of Fibery without sacrificing amazing features, completely free? If you’re going to offer no limits on things like databases, views, and spaces, then I think there should be a limit on entities. The same can be said in reverse.
My example may be too restrictive, but I certainly don’t think they need unlimited use. We’re not using Fibery because it’s cheaper than alternatives (even though it is once you add all the capabilities up and the tools it replaces), we’re using it because of how great it is. The issue is getting Free or Trial users to realize that sooner.
Here’s a more generous approach after reviewing other platforms:
- 3 spaces (enough to create new use cases)
- 3 users (enough for new teams to test things)
- 3-5 databases per space
- 100-500 entities per database (why do they need more on a free plan?)
- 5-10 fields per entity (Formulas are amazing in fibery and a key selling point. 10 fields are more than enough on a free plan)
- 3-5 views per space OR more views and limit smart folders to 3 per space (views are a main selling point. 5 views is great. If you want 15 views, and 5 smart folders, maybe consider paying?)
- 3 multi-views
- 3-5 rules/automations per database, with a limit of 250 executions per month
- Basic AI capabilities (like creating a space, generating reports, and limited workspace Q&A)
I believe this strikes a good balance—providing enough functionality for meaningful testing and exploration without giving everything away, encouraging users to become paying customers (especially serious or advanced users). If they need more entities, or enhanced features like increased limitations, permissions, or resources, they would have a reason to upgrade.
While users are on the free plan, it’s vital to guide them to understand the platform and appreciate all that Fibery can offer, leading them to eventually make the leap to a paid plan.
On the topic of multi-views for entities, I didn’t mind that it was a paid feature since I’m already a subscriber. However, I understand some users might need it for free use cases. A reasonable approach could be allowing 2-3 Entity Views per entity on the free plan, with additional views available only on the pro plan. That seems fair—if someone requires more than three views, they likely have substantial needs and should consider paying for the product.
It’s easier to increase the limits of a free plan than to reduce them once they’ve been set.