WHMCS Pricing Change?

[River]

I didn't notice until now, when I was looking for pricing on the WHMCS for licenses that they changed their pricing model in July to a 'tiered' model. It looks like their pricing went up too for the basic, that they cap at 250 clients, their next tier at 1000, and then finally the unlimited for almost $40/month.

This kinda pisses me off. I'd understand if they did a cheaper plan, say $5/month for companies with less than 250 clients, but the price increase and the tiers just is bad business. I hope a lot of people switch to blesta, I know I'll be switching over.

 

[CenTex Hosting]

They sent out several notices way before they did the price change. The way I look at it is its just another license fee like cpanel and so on. Now with changing the pricing means we get more updates and new things added then I have no issue with it.

If you look at the biggest change is the auto update. The amount of time this saves you more than enough covers the difference in price. Just my 2 cents

 

[River]

They sent out several notices way before they did the price change. The way I look at it is its just another license fee like cpanel and so on. Now with changing the pricing means we get more updates and new things added then I have no issue with it.

If you look at the biggest change is the auto update. The amount of time this saves you more than enough covers the difference in price. Just my 2 cents

I still think it's bad practice to make changes like that - There are other revenue streams they could have explored before imposing a client limit. Just my opinion though.

 

[zomgmike]

It's less strict than Ubersmith, at least, who limits other things like seats and devices in addition to clients (last I checked, at least.)

 

[Criot]

Don't forget that it's active clients, so if you have the settings in place which changes clients to 'inactive' when they have no products or services, this decreases the amount counting toward the limit.

For most it's not going to be a significant increase, and most already have owned licenses in place anyway, but in reality if you're using WHMCS for your business and have over 1000 clients, you should really be able to fork out $40 a month for quite a vital part of your business very easily.

 

[LiamCyrus]

After having to spend hours completely re-setting up my WHMCS environment (new server, reinstall nginx, php, mariadb, plugins, APIs, etc.) on two separate occasions because of their auto-updating failing and corrupting everything, I am absolutely never using that atrocity again.

 

[Servers4You]

To be fair, we have never used the auto-update feature as it has many issues with it, whether updating takes a long time or it fails & corrupts majority of the files, so to be safe, we do it manually for our WHMCS installations... With regards to the price hike, I don't particularly like it, but understand why they did it. They are trying to bring their software up to standards, bringing in new features (SSL, Stripe, Auto-Update), with 7.3, they are bringing in MailChimp Integration which allows us to email potential clients about pending carts they have etc, Social Media login/registration & many others that have literally been pending development for over 3 years (Stripe had been pending for just over 4 years). So if these features are now being implemented, I'm not going to complain about the price hike. But like @Criot said, if you have over 1000 clients, you should easily be able to fork out $40/mo.

 

[TierNet]

They have been changing their pricing and have also discontinued annual plan that offered further savings. If you want to pay yearly, they instead ask you to add funds so that the invoice gets paid automatically. sigh.

 

[Lampard]

Well WHMCS is increasing their prices because many companies are using it. Now they want new companies to buy owned license because they know that by paying in terms, they will earn more profit. Blesta is better. Most companies have already moved to Blesta.

 

[stefiee]

blesta is better compared to WHMCS
WHMCS-All around solid platform with a powerfull addons
blesta-most customised options when it comes to billing and cost effetcive compared to WHMCS

 

[XiNiX]

Their pricing is still better than HostBill . Blesta would be a great alternative for people looking fr cheaper license.

 

[HostOjo]

Yes Shifting to Blesta is a very good choice as whmcs do not let small hosting providers a trial access.
It means that even when we have to try how this thing works we have to buy a plan.
There must be a trial period.
And for the big hosting providers , they must already be using the lifetime liscence.

 

[DavidFeldman]

I agree, the new pricing for WHMCS makes it less interesting than before. If we didn't own a license, we would for sure consider the other options more seriously.

 

[mobin]

Yes, WHMCS pricing is over killing for small and medium-sized hosts and they have taken off the owned license model as well. Blesta or ClientExec are the best 2 low cost alternatives if you are ok to run your business with the features they offer.

 

[coreyman]

Yes, WHMCS pricing is over killing for small and medium-sized hosts and they have taken off the owned license model as well. Blesta or ClientExec are the best 2 low cost alternatives if you are ok to run your business with the features they offer.

What is a small to medium sized host to you? $100/mo profit for a small host to $500/mo profit for a medium host? I can see WHMCS hurting the bottom line with these numbers. In my opinion if you are doing $1,000's per month you are small, $10,000's per month you are medium, $100,000's per month you are large, $1,000,000's per month you are extra large/corporate. None of these incomes would be affected by a WHMCS license. It costs more in development time to get a product with this many features than just paying the monthly fee. Yes it does suck that WHMCS went up in price, I hated it too, but we can still afford it.

 

[mobin]

When I say the small host you already explained it. People who are running with minimal turnover should find this price increase little painful. Of course I agree they may be charging for what they provide, but the increase in price for the same product is bit difficult to digest when there is not much money to spend for it. Such people go for the optimal and cost-effective solution in all terms I believe and price increase when more features are added will make it more painful especially for billing system as it's not that easy to migrate over later.

 

[throttle]

@HostOjo,

I would say go with blesta. Pretty straight for to set up.

 

[HostPlax.com]

I didn't notice until now, when I was looking for pricing on the WHMCS for licenses that they changed their pricing model in July to a 'tiered' model. It looks like their pricing went up too for the basic, that they cap at 250 clients, their next tier at 1000, and then finally the unlimited for almost $40/month.

This kinda pisses me off. I'd understand if they did a cheaper plan, say $5/month for companies with less than 250 clients, but the price increase and the tiers just is bad business. I hope a lot of people switch to blesta, I know I'll be switching over.

They charge high because providing lots of features but most of the providers do not need it or we never use all those features.
I think you should try hands on blesta trial version before switching it.