3 ms·

Oh wow, that's some very bad practices. Kicking out a user who criticizes you a bit about something shady is ought to not end well (in PR point of view) I had

Oh wow, that's some very bad practices. Kicking out a user who criticizes you a bit about something shady is ought to not end well (in PR point of view) I had similar experience with New Relic. They don't restrict you on the amount of agents you add based on what you pay, so you have to manually purchase licenses for agents. So by a mistake we were paying for 3-4 agents but were using 6-7. A year later we get a email from sales guy "pay us 10k or sign a 1 year contract for our services" We ditched them a day before our contract ended. Would never use them again.

Hamuko 6y ago
That doesn't sound at all bad. You were using more resources than you were paying for and they asked you to upgrade afterwards. I'm assuming that they didn't force you to automatically upgrade.
- simplyinfinity 6y ago
  They basically forced us to sign a contract. They didn't implement any resource usage checks, so you could use more than you were paying for, without any notification of excess usage. They do this so they can force retain customers. Any normal company that has usage based pricing sends you the actual bill at the end of the month. Not in this case. In this case you (the customer) have to monitor your own usage and buy licenses dynamically leaving a huge room for error since there are 0 warnings/limits "you are using more than you are paying", when this can be achieved by the system itself.
- luckylion 6y ago
  > That doesn't sound at all bad. "Wait for a year until the bill is high enough instead of telling them after a week that they probably have missed adding those licences and it's going to cost them $x more if they wish to keep using those extra users". Yeah, sounds not bad at all.
  - Hamuko 6y ago
    I don't think New Relic does retroactive charging. I think we were using more New Relic resources than we had paid for by accident and nothing really came out of it. We just fixed the issue and continued with the plan.

Hamuko 6y ago

That doesn't sound at all bad. You were using more resources than you were paying for and they asked you to upgrade afterwards. I'm assuming that they didn't force you to automatically upgrade.

simplyinfinity 6y ago
They basically forced us to sign a contract. They didn't implement any resource usage checks, so you could use more than you were paying for, without any notification of excess usage. They do this so they can force retain customers. Any normal company that has usage based pricing sends you the actual bill at the end of the month. Not in this case. In this case you (the customer) have to monitor your own usage and buy licenses dynamically leaving a huge room for error since there are 0 warnings/limits "you are using more than you are paying", when this can be achieved by the system itself.
luckylion 6y ago
> That doesn't sound at all bad. "Wait for a year until the bill is high enough instead of telling them after a week that they probably have missed adding those licences and it's going to cost them $x more if they wish to keep using those extra users". Yeah, sounds not bad at all.
- Hamuko 6y ago
  I don't think New Relic does retroactive charging. I think we were using more New Relic resources than we had paid for by accident and nothing really came out of it. We just fixed the issue and continued with the plan.