As many of us in the n8n community are aware, the recent pricing changes have left a sour taste in our mouths. The new self-hosted Business plan’s per-execution billing model has sparked widespread concern and frustration. In this post, I want to explore the reasons behind this backlash and propose some constructive alternatives.
Firstly, it’s essential to acknowledge the value n8n brings to our workflows. The tool has empowered thousands of makers and teams to automate tasks efficiently, and many of us have championed it within our companies and contributed to its growth. However, the new pricing model feels like a punch in the gut, especially for those of us who self-host. The cost of infrastructure is already a significant expense, and adding a usage fee on top of that feels like paying twice.
The main concerns with the per-execution billing model are threefold. Firstly, it discourages growth, as success would lead to a dramatic increase in costs. Secondly, it penalizes efficiency, as optimizing workflows for performance doesn’t translate to cost savings. Lastly, it complicates budgeting, as usage can spike unpredictably, making it difficult for finance teams to green-light n8n.
So, what can be done to address these concerns? The community has proposed several alternatives, including seat- or workspace-based pricing, support subscriptions, marketplace revenue sharing, and execution pools. These models would respect the self-hosting cost structure and encourage us to scale with n8n rather than seeking alternatives.
It’s crucial for n8n to understand that customer love and retention are everything in today’s fast-paced tech landscape. We want n8n to thrive and remain independent, but we need a pricing model that reflects our needs and values. Let’s work together to find a solution that benefits both parties.
What do you think about the new pricing model and the proposed alternatives? Share your thoughts in the comments below!