Help

This Product Ideas board is currently undergoing updates, but please continue to submit your ideas.

Additional storage idea

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
attachment
4 - Data Explorer
4 - Data Explorer
Status: New Ideas

Yes, that's the idea. Allow my to buy more storage for my paid Team plan.  I'm even willing to pay! But I only value the storage, not everything else that comes with moving from Team -> Business (that move just to get an 80GB storage for $300/yr seems rather...hmm...excessive; I'll try to ignore comparisons that Dropbox offers 3TB for free).

I'm a simple user, and quickly hit the AT 1GB limit in just a couple weeks of learning to use the service, and have one Base. The 1GB is a low storage amount, but I somewhat understand it...Free is really a trial plan, no problem. I liked AT and wanted to continue, so had to move up to Team ("For teams building apps to collaborate on shared workflows"). I don't mind paying more just to get storage, but the 'Team' is just me and my cat. Team could be also described as "For individual users that need more storage" and 'Business' described as "For individual users that need a bit more storage."

Point is, it really doesn't make much sense to not allow individuals (and actual Teams) to purchase additional storage (which I understand from another thread is provided by Box). One day maybe I'll reach where I require other functionality, but I suspect I'll go through the Team level of storage (20GB, which is easily reached in my work, which is based on the Museum template) before I need more functionality, and then will have to think about another solution.

Quite the bummer to not create a Free-Good-Better-Best pricing structure where your limits aren't based so much on feature differences, but capacity. A pricing model like this gets implemented as AT wants to use this lever to get companies to move to the next tier, so it tells us that a lot of users care more limits such as storage versus features. If AT doesn't want to be in the storage-adding business that is OK, but it would seem that then the ability to point to attachments held elsewhere would be a requirement.

And I realize from the Community that AT doesn't read these comments or respond, so this post is indeed for cathartic purposes only.