Thanks for replying. Your idea of only increasing in small steps is interesting, and I can see why you'd do it like that. I imagine $1/user fully scaling is pr

Thanks for replying. Your idea of only increasing in small steps is interesting, and I can see why you'd do it like that. I imagine $1/user fully scaling is probably impossible - it's probably unfair to compete when Atlassian might even be running Bitbucket at a loss and you presumably have no other major products under the same company. I can see how you'd be better value in some way at certain boundaries in price points - but I'm not convinced you'd ever become cheaper. I haven't drawn the graph, but if you used the full 25-50 jump, going from 25-50 users eventually, thats a $75 increase on your service. I see where you're coming from, but the scalar of 3x per user is probably too high for them jumps to become significant. Fair enough, Bitbucket does have a free one, but I haven't used Jira which is obviously more powerful. You may well be better there. And again, allowing self hosting is a really cool move. I'd definitely consider it because I think the cost, even with Bitbucket, would soon become significant compared to the one time cost of a server. In all honesty, I might be being completely unfair. I'm comparing Bitbucket alone and it's main options. You have teams, Bitbucket does, but yours could well be better - maybe Atlassian's Confluence is a fairer comparison. Same with issue tracking, Bitbucket does have it, but maybe you compare better with Jira. If you would say your service compares fairly to Bitbucket, though, I don't really know how you can improve it short of cutting the $3/user/month, which I imagine isn't a reasonable request. If that's not going to happen, which I'd expect is the case, the way you scale is probably fairest. I would say to look at the business package and what you're offering though - if it competes with Confluence you're priced fairly, but if it competes with Bitbucket's standard team features, I think that's significantly overpriced.