Announcing Account Based Pricing

[kUdtiHaEX]

So, let us sum up the things:
1. This is a pure money grab. Robbery. Corporate greed in a nutshell, a perfect example what happens when someone has a monopoly.
2. cPanel Management clearly does not have any respect to its customer base.
3. The lack of respect is clearly shown with the lack of communication or any proper notice in advance.
4. The per-account pricing model is insane. cPanel has no additional expenses if we host 500 instead of 50 customers per server, so this 100+ bull**** is just - bull****.
5. The reason for this money grab is obvious - cPanel does not care about end customers but only about its own pockets. They are quite unhappy that a lot of providers is able to stack hundreds of accounts per server. For providers, that is cost control or way of doing business (and that is their own right), for cPanel that is a lost revenue because they bill us per server, so they want a piece of our cake too.
6. If cPanel was really deeply concerned about end users, there were other solutions - increase the prices of current licenses, but cap the license to a fixed number of users (something that has sense like 500). If cPanel has issues providing support to those who are overselling their servers, then increase support prices for them.
7. None of us is against of a price increase, but that increase has to be justified and acceptable from the business standpoint. Increasing our expenses by margin of 300 - 800% is unacceptable and there is no argument on this planet that cPanel can use to justify it (except - they are greedy). Not to mention the lack of innovation that is clearly visible from the cPanel side.
8. We cannot allow this type of pricing because there is not going to be anything for us to do when they increase prices from 0.2 to 0.4 per account next year or in six months or whenever. If we swallow this now then this shallow "added value" argument is going to be used again to justify another money grab.
9. There are alternatives cPanel. Maybe those alternatives are not currently on the same level but they will be. They will catch up after this, and I am, as many others here, very motivated to try them out, spend time and money evaluating them and then migrating away from your product because I do not trust you anymore and I do not want to be ...... again like this. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice - well shame on me.

 

[mikepro]

We use cPanel for about 15 years. Changing pricing model (not license price) for existing customers is for me shocking. You turn everything upside down. We would have to replan servers infrastructure and customers hosting plans for this change. This also causes many problems like suspended accounts etc.

This new pricing will make us either switch to other service or develop our own solution/panel. I hope we would not have to do it and you will cancel this idea in the next few days so we can use our IT resources to new hosting features istead of "how to switch from cPanel".

 

[maakum]

Very well put kUdtiHaEX, we second this. Indeed, the trust is gone. Shame on you cPanel!

 

[Jorge]

800% increase of price, it’s mad, we will definitely migrate our servers to other control panel and I hope all other providers will do the same and boycott the cPanel/Plesk completely as they need to learn the lesson hard way. Plesk will follow shortly as it’s controlled by the same shareholders.

Today I announced to my customers that we are moving to DirectAdmin. Same features, just a bit ugly, lower price.

 

[planetjoin]

Hello

This is really insane? or could be a very nice "clean up" of many (MANY) hosting companies with a abusive business model" in market?
There are lot companies offering packages with UNLIMITED sites, Resellers pacakges with UNLIMITED sites, and hosting 800/1000 sites in one unique server (even with 40 cores, and 192GB of ram) selling web hosting at ridiculuos prices.

My thougts :
1 - Before these new "account based prices" the cpanel monthly price with unlimited sites was $45 monthly.
2 - In buycpanel or panellicence (and many other distributors) the prices was from $30 to $38 monthly
3 - When you buy a dedicated server in almost any datacenter, they offer you a very low price in cpanel licence. (in my case I´m paying $20 the same that cpanel offers $45 in the official site)

I have MANY servers online but i not host more than 200 sites per server.
If i think in a logical way, my datacenter will still offer me the same price $20 at least for 100 accounts, and as they still buying bulk licences, surely each additional site not will cost $0,20, but $0,10 or less. At $0,10 per additional site, paying $20 for 100 sites, i will pay only $10 more per server to get 100 sites more. (or maybe, the datacenter will offers at $20 with 200 accounts as "minimum price")

Then. finally . where and to whom affect this new prices? :
1 - to all companies offering very very cheap prices (in shared and reseller accounts) using unlimited cpanel accounts licences
2 - to all companies with a business model using BIG and supr powerful servers with ONE cpanel licence and host more fo 900 sites in a single machine.

Again.. could be a good cleanup on the market offers

Regads
Fabian Marsiglione

 

[Benjamin Biswas]

You just destroy your own business, because lot's of your customer like me will be migrated to "directadmin".

 

[planetjoin]

4. The per-account pricing model is insane. cPanel has no additional expenses if we host 500 instead of 50 customers per server, so this 100+ bull**** is just - bull****.

I think it not too insane. Host A LOT sites on the same machine, and sell hosting packages at very low prices is insane for the market.
You or others, maybe host 800 sites in a single machine but in a powerful one (40 cores, 192GB of ram or similar), but MANY hostings host 800 sites in a celeron machine and have lot problems. Maybe cpanel not want to get too many problems and support tickets from those companies.

6. If cPanel was really deeply concerned about end users, there were other solutions - increase the prices of current licenses, but cap the license to a fixed number of users (something that has sense like 500). If cPanel has issues providing support to those who are overselling their servers, then increase support prices for them.

I agree, but i think the "minimum licence" must to be 200 sites (instead 100) and not 500.

Regards

 

[DomineauX]

Why does everyone seem to think that this change is going to make companies move to a larger number of smaller servers?
Seems like the cost per account gets smaller with the more accounts you cram onto a machine.
For example, if you have 800 accounts:

800 accounts handled in different ways:

1 Powerful server:
$45 (first 100 accounts on metal license)
$140 (700 accounts at $0.20/account)
---------------
$185/month

4 smaller servers:
$180 (4x first 100 account on metal licenses)
$80 (400 accounts at $0.20/account)
---------------
$260/month

8 tiny servers:
$360 (8x first 100 account on metal licenses)
---------------
$360/month

8 VPS servers:
$360 (8x first 100 account on cloud licenses)
---------------
$360/month

 

[vacancy]

I think it not too insane. Host A LOT sites on the same machine, and sell hosting packages at very low prices is insane for the market.
You or others, maybe host 800 sites in a single machine but in a powerful one (40 cores, 192GB of ram or similar), but MANY hostings host 800 sites in a celeron machine and have lot problems. Maybe cpanel not want to get too many problems and support tickets from those companies.



I agree, but i think the "minimum licence" must to be 200 sites (instead 100) and not 500.

Regards

No noticeable difference between 100 and 200.

Considering the costs, this pricing is not profitable.

Account-based pricing should be completely removed or more flexible pricing.

10 domains - vps
50 domains - vps
500 domains - vps-dedicated
Unlimited licenses - dedicated

When the domain limit is reached, no new account can be opened, and higher licenses are added to add new domains. So the control is in the hands of the customer, no surprise invoice.

 

[Shazan]

Why does everyone seem to think that this change is going to make companies move to a larger number of smaller servers?

No, this change is going to make companies move to OTHER panels like DirectAdmin.

 

[planetjoin]

800 accounts handled in different ways:

1 Powerful server:
$45 (first 100 accounts on metal license)
$140 (700 accounts at $0.20/account)
---------------
$185/month

4 smaller servers:
$180 (4x first 100 account on metal licenses)
$80 (400 accounts at $0.20/account)
---------------
$260/month

8 tiny servers:
$360 (8x first 100 account on metal licenses)
---------------
$360/month

8 VPS servers:
$360 (8x first 100 account on cloud licenses)
---------------
$360/month

Yes, because you are thinking as a company hosting +800 domains per server.
To every company hosting no more of 200 per server this will not affect too much. In fact is a good news in some ways..

I´m selling hosting since more of 20 years (since cobalt RAQ2 servers) and to live relaxed and sleep well at nights, i always host a MAX of 200 domains per server (and i not sell any "unlimited" shared package, nor unlimited reseller neither - also my prices are normally more expensive - obviosly for my costs). Now.. many companies selling UNLIMITED hosting at ridiculuos prices maybe must change their business model or change to another panel...

 

[parawing742]

I get it. Prices go up from time to time, but there's no reason to be dishonest about it. From: cPanel Partners and Distributors FAQ

Why are we changing our pricing structure?
We want to simplify the process of adding new servers and make it easier to become a cPanel customer.
​

How does raising prices "simplify the process of adding new servers"?

Will I see any benefits from this updated pricing structure?
Yes. By continuing to refine cPanel's focus on the user experience and taking into consideration cPanel Account density per instance, cPanel Partners and customers will be able to provision their hosting infrastructure more effectively.
​

How does raising prices enable us "to provision our hosting infrastructure more effectively"?

Why are we moving to a per cPanel Account model?
By moving to a per cPanel Account model, we are providing you with the tools to more effectively use a finite amount of computing resources, and only be billed for the number of cPanel Accounts that you have.
​

How does raising prices "provide us with the tools to more effectively use computing resources"?

 

[philb]

It's really not possible to seriously claim that you are "simplifying" anything when you're introducing a bunch of admin work to have to micromanage the number of accounts each reseller customer / vps / dedicated server customer can create. You could have gotten rid of the VPS licence AND added 20% on top of the old metal price, narrowed the basis on which you supply free support etc, and everyone would have been annoyed but mostly stuck with it.

It's the micromanagement you introduced while also nickel and diming licence holders who have a use model that uses a lot of accounts, billing even for suspended accounts, etc that takes us from merely gouging into a truly bold new era of not giving a single, solitary **** about your customer base.

We pulled our reseller products the moment we found out about this and we're going to be evaluating alternative panels. Shared and reseller hosting is a small enough piece for that given the direction of travel for us as a business, I'd actually sooner not do it at all than reward this behaviour: we'll have to let the dedicated server customers make their own decisions (though we will be heavily extolling the virtues of any even half-suitable alternatives).

I don't realistically expect any substantive change in approach from the hundreds of complaints; this change is of course designed to boost the value in the short term so it can be flipped for an even greater price to the next VCs who will have to jack the pricing again to pay back *their* debt/investors, repeat ad nauseum until it collapses in on itself, Toys'R'Us style, when the business and/or their customers can no longer afford to shoulder that burden.

Just admit your new owners long ago built a shrine to the dollar. At least then you'd be honest. Trying to convince us this is in some way helpful for us is sheer fantasy, and you're rightly getting called out for it.

 

[vacancy]

Take cpanel's survey.

https://twitter.com/cPanel/status/1145739629687201792

 

[planetjoin]

It's really not possible to seriously claim that you are "simplifying" anything when you're introducing a bunch of admin work to have to micromanage the number of accounts each reseller customer / vps / dedicated server customer can create. You could have gotten rid of the VPS licence AND added 20% on top of the old metal price, narrowed the basis on which you supply free support etc, and everyone would have been annoyed but mostly stuck with it.

I agree only in the part of charge per account basis. I´ve already told Benny of cpanel and send a feature request for that. I agree with the LIMIT changes, but i think the "additional" accounts must to be in 100 domains bulk price (for example : $10 each 100 sites)
So, if you want 300 accounts, you can pay $45 + $20 (easier to admin)
In fact, not forget the cpanel official page price is not the same price you can get the licence in distributors and datacenters.
buypanel or panellicence are selling the same for $30/$35 instaead $45
datacenters are selling the same for $20/$25

In my case, my datacenter charge me for each cpanel licencia until now $20 I assume the new price will be the same $20, but instead for unlimited sites, will be for 100 sites. If cpanel can change the additional sites prices in bulk.. surely the datacenter will charge no more of $5 for 100 additional accounts (taking an account that they are offering now $45 + $20 for 100 additional accounts ($0,20 x 100)

Again.. if someone in my datacenter is paying NOW $20 for unlimited licence and have 500 sites in one server and each additional 100 sites costs $5.. then, they will pay ONLY $20 extras per server. I think is not too much to host 500 sites in one single server

 

[kUdtiHaEX]

I think it not too insane. Host A LOT sites on the same machine, and sell hosting packages at very low prices is insane for the market.
You or others, maybe host 800 sites in a single machine but in a powerful one (40 cores, 192GB of ram or similar), but MANY hostings host 800 sites in a celeron machine and have lot problems. Maybe cpanel not want to get too many problems and support tickets from those companies.



I agree, but i think the "minimum licence" must to be 200 sites (instead 100) and not 500.

Regards

Let us clear some things up first:
1. We have a strict 300 acc/instance policy (KVM instance, carefully configured to cope with 300 accounts). I really do like a good sleep, but I hate toil, operational overhead, inefficiency and being stressed.

2. I do not see those who are selling unlimited/unlimited for $1/year as my competition because I do not try to compete with them nor I ever will. When I compare myself I choose to compare with those who are better, not with those who are going to go out of business faster than they actually arrived.

3. If end customer is satisfied with a bad service, non-existent support and questionable uptime, it's her/his problem. cPanel or anyone else for that matter has no right to tell to anyone how to run their business. I personally like a good night sleep, happy customers and providing a good service. Those who are not willing to pay because it is too expensive for their taste, well I am sorry there are others. It is a free market after all. There is a sayin here in my country that translated directly says - those who burn their tongue once, blow to the cold ice cream before trying it.

If cPanel has a problem with that sort of license customers, well make them pay 10x more for the support. It is the same thing I do to those who are making too much trouble on my servers. It is a matter of education.

4. This whole argument of "poor cPanel has problems so they decided to show a middle finger to a 90% of their customers who are decent providers because of 10% of bad apples" is plain stupid. I am very sorry, but there are bad apples in every industry. There is no any good argument to charge us per account because:
a) We provide resources for those accounts, not cPanel,
b) We provide customer support to each one of them, not cPanel,
c) We pay all other expenses for all those customers, not cPanel,
d) We pay our taxes, salaries of our employees, accounting, we invest in our people and have 101 additional expense to do business, not cPanel,
e) When things go south, we are taking care that everyone is happy and satisfied and if required, we loose some of our income, not cPanel.

So I am very sorry, but I do not see why would cPanel charge any of us for additional accounts that are entirely our expense. I can understand that sort of pricing strategy for a real SaaS such as Atlassian JIRA, but there is a huge difference between cPanel and JIRA (or any other SaaS for that matter).

At the end, I also would like to see a proper arguments for the "100" or yours "200" cap. Is that a hunch? Is that how we arrived to this point, someone was just bored in the middle of lunch or a meeting so he/she decided to write a strategy on a piece of paper in 3 minutes without thinking about consequences?

- "100 is good enough, and if we charge 45 instead of 15 we are going to earn 3x more! And if we cap them to a 100 accounts and charge them for additional accounts we are going to earn even more."
- "What a brilliant idea, give that guy a medal."

 

[kunnusingh]

This move broke my trust in cPanel/Plesk.

This is modern robbery method invented by new owner of cP/Plesk.

 

[yamaharr1]

Well I moved 1 server already to Interworx 10x better than DA
DA has to much command line Interworx sets up fast and most is done right from GUI this looks like the way to go.

 

[Kain]

It is insane to have such a massive increase. If we pass it on to our clients we will be at a disadvantage against providers of lower cost solutions such as Plesk.

I see no alternative but to move to Plesk or similar.($45 for unlimited accounts according to their website)

My suggestion would be to increase the bulk limit to 500 accounts per server which would at least make licencing prices somewhat competitive.

 

[IndicHosts.net]

I see no alternative but to move to Plesk or similar.($45 for unlimited accounts according to their website)

Are you sure? That will be like dropping from frying pan into the fire