Pricing initial feedback

1

Hi, on https://medium.com/fibery/fibery-io-chronicles-13-hot-august-85dd7cc3e96e, it talks about the pricing concept. A couple points of feedback on that:

  • if number of entites are limited, I think it should be easily possible to archive them
  • archiving could be some magic you do, where the entities are moved to a cheaper storage, or, something we do, like export an xml or json file, which can be re-loaded if we need to
  • auto-archive to some offsite storage, like saving an xml file to an sftp server or s3 bucket for instance, would be slick
  • is your intent to just have the system stop working, if the org hits the limits?

I have no concept yet of how soon we would hit the limits, if we got the 17 dollar / user / mo version.

2

Thanks for the feedback! The pricing is not final, we are going to review and adjust it based on people feedback.

  1. So far you can delete entities and free space.
  2. Now you can export an app with the whole entities and import it again if required

Here is what will happen when you’ll reach the limit:

If you reach entities or attachments limit, we will let you know. You will be able to use your account without any restrictions for 14 days. This is the best time to upgrade your Fibery plan :wink:

If you don’t upgrade during these two weeks, you won’t be able to create new entities, attach files or set up new automations any more — depending on the particular limit you hit.

Also note:

If you took part in our private beta, you’ll have 12 months for free without any limitations starting from the day of the public launch.

1 Like
3

Also wanted to weigh in here: I am all but sold as you guys have done a terrific job making a nocode platform that is easy enough for a non-developer, but has all the flexibility that I can imagine, especially with a few more features that I’m sure you have coming. I have been studying just about everything out there for my team for the last two years, and I am impressed at your team and in particular @mdubakov good sense of the market, teams needs, and excellent command of other tools’ limitations.

I do think that if you got to a full team using Fibery and it was in the $25+ range per seat, that would become prohibited. I looked closely at Wrike and it was just too much at $23/seat for full-featured users. They had collaborators that I thought about putting developers into, as that permission level didn’t have admin privileges, but there was no time tracking, so that really killed the functionality of that type of seat.

I’d like to see you guys in the $10/month range for most of a team’s “rank and file” users, and some kind of tiers for admins. Or just a scheme that was in the $10, maybe $12/month for a full team. Alternatively, as I was hoping to accomplish with Wrike, you could have a collaborator function that would have enough capability for things like creating tasks, tracking time, commenting, changing status, etc., but not creating views, apps, etc.

I am all but sold and ready to start in when the pricing comes on line, but I do hope you will not be in the $20 plus range for a team of say 15 - 20, which is where I expect to be in 6 months or so.

Hope that’s useful guys!

4

Just some further comments from me since we have also been looking at Wrike.

Wrike’s SaaS and Fibery’s basically PaaS. With Wrike you get the features they present you. They’ve been developing it since 2008 or so, so it’s well polished with great UX, and a friend who uses it is saying Wrike have been releasing features frequently. My impression of Fibery is, you can use a template app, but you can also mostly build what you want. So, if you need your data in Fibery, you can have it, and there’s a way to get it in there. With Wrike, no, it is what it is.

An example: Wrike has loads of various articles about how you can do this and that in the system. It’s true, you basically can, but the challenge is, everything is single type of entity, so, a task. If you want a wiki, there’s no wiki app, but, you can make a folder or project, treat it as a container, then put tasks under and treat each as a “wiki page”. Wrike has a cool list view, which is a split view with the task list at left, and the task description displayed prominently at right. That structure is why they can kind of “fake” making a wiki or whatever structure. Fibery’s going to let us have an actual wiki, which can be linked really flexibly. Wrike doesn’t compete with that sort of thing.

Wrike’s base fee of USD 24.80-ish / user / mo increases if you add features, like if you want Timesheets and resource leveling which are included with the “Resource” option. Adding options brings that price up to 40-ish. With Fibery you can develop what you need for the price, but it appears there’s some idea of compromising with the number of entities available. To me that approach is pretty opaque unless there’s an easy way if I can see I’m near the limit, and, an easy way to archive and restore if I need to. Just having to delete data with no recourse is not a good plan.

Currently, Wrike has good integration with MS Office 365, namely in Teams and the ability to easily make a task from Outlook, and those features are popular with users, per my friend. Fibery’s a lot younger an app, and despite the obvious talent the Fibery team has, Wrike have like 700 employees. It’s gonna take some time for team Fibery to catch up, but, I think it’s a fantastic platform.

@mdubakov correct me if I’m wrong of course.

5

@B_Sp
Thanks for your enthusiasm!
We just revealed final pricing and here it is. Basically, pricing is from $7 to $17 per user per month for annual subscription and $9 to $21 for month-by-month payments. In your case it seems $7 per user per month will be enough.

07
071482×844 30.3 KB

6

@rickcogley Your Wrike description is spot-on. Basically, Wrike has two kind of entities - Folders/Projects and Tasks. Interestingly, you can indeed find many workarounds with this basic structure and do many things (track HR, Projects, etc). Still I believe Wrike will not be a good fit for the whole organization. It mostly focusing on Marketing teams, agencies, etc, thus other processes are not well supported.

Fibery is indeed young and on my opinion it will take 2-3 more years for us to catch up with major functionality like automations, integrations, sharing data, but in its core Fibery is more flexible and “ready to evolve with the company” than Wrike.

3 Likes
7

Thanks. Plus, the way Wrike are selling it is, if you need a more custom approach you can pay for the special option to get it. A bit odd to let people do something in a super generic way in a system not designed for that, then upsell them into doing it right this time…

8

Just wanted to weigh back in here guys that as somebody who ultimately chose Wrike at one point and used it for a while with my team, mainly for the flexibility of tasks and folders/projects being very interchangeable, I can say that the promise of Fibery is far greater and I for one already see a ton more capability in Fibery than Wrike can offer, now!, so I don’t think we need to even worry about waiting 2-3 years for “catching up” to Wrike. @rickcogley, I think in fact a limitation Wrike is coming up against is too much bloat with a huge team, and too old a platform having been around since 2008. If you look on the community, there are tons of dissatisfied users asking for things like converting task to projects, arranging the order of Spaces without being forced to add a “1.” or “2.” since they are ordered currently statically. Fibery does this stuff as an afterthought! What’s more, Wrike’s pricing is ridiculous. I think they fancy themselves the Salesforce of the project management world, with a forced year-long license, and way too many expensive add-ons. If you add Wrike for Marketers, Resource, Integrate - you are around $100/month/user. This is all basic stuff most tools like Hive, Clickup, even Jira can offer at a fraction of the cost, not to mention Fibery.

And just to get back to Pricing, as I am on the free for now (and thanks guys for the beta testers love here!), I am still curious if the pricing can be set up on a tiered basis? To clarify, can you have a large group of users who are basically “working,” and not “creating,” in Fibery, on the $7//month tier, while the admins/creators on the $19/month tier. If you guys have not set up this tier approach yet, hopefully you will consider it. Like I mentioned previously, if my team can get to 30-40, but most of these are software engineers just “working,” not building apps, relationships, etc. in Fibery, I’d like to pay more around what Jira and similar apps charge for those users, in the $10/month range for a team this size.

Hope that’s all useful commentary, and I am continuing to be impressed as I move further down the road with Fibery!

9

@B_Sp Nice comment. We do consider different pricing for different roles and I do agree that it will be more fair to bill creators more and bill basic collaborator less. However, we want to learn first how people will use Fibery and then adjust the pricing to be more fair. For small teams on average there should be no difference to be honest, since for example for team of 10 there maybe 3 creators for $20 and 7 collaborators for $5, thus $95, while now 10*$7 = $70. So we’ll see how it goes, but we do want to provide as fair price as possible.

10

@mdubakov, thank you for that, as usual very astute, and glad to hear my planned growth with Fibery will be affordable!