Can we have different plans / price points / data combinations / plan sizes?

[Michel L.]

Hi, I find limited in the choices of subscription plans. Basic/free and Pro/110$

I'd gladly pay something like 25$ a year for 50GB and a 2 users family plan.

Considering iCloud have a 12$ plan for 20 GB and 48$ for 200GB, that seems reasonable..

[Kike A.]

I would prefer to pay $5 for 100GB than $10 for 1TB. I would save $60 each year and that is significant for me, especially if I do not need more than 80GB. If my 20GB for free are viable, why not 100GB for $5? I think that would even mean a huge expansion of Dropbox to other users in less rich countries!

[Mark]

I think that would even mean a huge expansion of Dropbox to other users in less rich countries!

And possibly a huge downgrade to people in others.... 

[Chock L.]

I think Dropbox should seriously consider 50GB-100GB plan, most of the users will not need 1TB, I merely use 10GB, but I am sure will pay 9.99/year for a 100GB storage account, but not 99.00/year for 1TB that I know will not use that amount of space.

[Elizabeth B.7]

I would like to pay half and get 1/4 or even 1/8 of the storage size. If dropbox is losing so much money from users dropping plan sizes, its an indication of how popular the smaller sizes are. Surely dropbox can see how many people are storing how much data. Dropbox saying woo! as long as we tell them they can use 1Tb we can charge them heaps, not that anyone is using that and we don't actually have to provide it because no one is using it. 

Your argument that Dropbox loses money because people decrease their plan size when smaller plans are available leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[Robert S.]

Your argument that Dropbox loses money because people decrease their plan size when smaller plans are available leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Why?

Dropbox are perfectly clear about the level of service they provide and the price point they need to provide it.

100GB or 1TB, it costs DB the same to run your account, so they offer you 1TB and you use what you need.

There have been demands for many and various price plans ever since Dropbox first opened in 2008, Dropbox trialled tiered price plans and found they were a great way to lose money.

Doomsayers, more often than not of the non-paying variety, regularly wash up here and claim that this-or-that price plan is essential or Dropbox will lose customers. None have been right yet, usage figures continue to increase, now in excess of four hundred million and rising.

I'm not aware of any rule which states Dropbox have to pursue policy they already know is detrimental to their business and it's not as if Dropbox is the only game in town. Competition is a wonderful thing, if something doesn't suit your needs, then other services are available.

[Elizabeth B.7]

To me it indicates that instead of assessing whats its users want/need, they instead make it difficult for entry level users to support dropbox. I currently don't pay for dropbox, I would be willing to pay 1/2 their current amount a month for an 1/8 of what they offer, but they want to charge larger amounts to users who don't need large amounts. 

I suppose I prefer companies who at least attempt to look like they like the underdog. I like dropbox as a company, why don't they like me?

I just suddenly thought of something - I'm currently a student, so education pricing?

[Robert S.]

To me it indicates that instead of assessing whats its users want/need...

Or, perhaps it might simply indicate that Dropbox trialled tiered pricing and found it wasn't viable, which is the case. It doesn't mean the pricing model is set in stone and will never change. It has in fact changed several times and will no doubt do so again, but for solid reasons and not because a few loud voices on a forum think it's a good idea.

I'm currently a student, so education pricing?

Sorry, there's no preferential pricing for students.

They do however often run student promotions, like this years Campus Cup.

[Elizabeth B.7]

Thanks for that - I now have extra space 🙂 but it still "solve" my problem, if it is a problem. 

I would like to pay for dropbox. I do not have room in my budget to pay $10 a month. Google drive offers 100gb for $2 a month. I would quite happily pay that, for less data. 

My comment re education pricing was maybe to stop people dropping to lower plan sizes, dropbox could restrict who has access to the lower price bands. For example, to students. 

[Robert S.]

...it still "solve" my problem, if it is a problem. 

I would like to pay for dropbox. I do not have room in my budget to pay $10 a month. Google drive offers 100gb for $2 a month. I would quite happily pay that, for less data.

What you've consistently chosen to ignore thus far is that Dropbox trialled tiered pricing and found it was a great way to lose money.

I'm not aware of any rule which states they must accede to whatever demands are laid at their door, for example unsustainable price plans, which are detrimental to their business.

As I understand it, the major costs aren't particularly in association with the storage space. What costs the money is each time you access/upload/download stuff in that space, for which they get charged (you don't). Regardless of whether you have a 100GB account or a 1TB account your going to roughly average the same amount of pulls, so the cost to DB will be the same.

Unlike Dropbox, Google are in a position to subsidise their price plans from other income streams in their business. That said, if a service which is known to parse user data to deliver targeted advertisements hits that sweet spot, then by all means go for it and more power to you.

[Elizabeth B.7]

I think I've not articulated my point properly. I am saying that Dropbox is losing multiple people who are willing to pay for a smaller service. 

Dropbox already has x amount of users. If Dropbox adds a second tier for say half the price, some percentage of the x original users drop to the lower tier. 

But what about the people who won't pay the higher amount but are willing to pay a lower amount? 

I understand you are saying that they do not have a big enough impact that they outweigh the original users who would drop to the lower tier. 

My point is, wouldn't it be nice if we could come up with a different system that was able to let some of the potential paying clients pay for the lower tier whilst still restricting the original clients. For example, education pricing.

When I write out "still restricting the original clients" I get the bad taste in my mouth I mentioned before because it becomes "Dropbox is not willing to provide what those clients want because of profit margins". I understand that Dropbox is a company, Dropbox should be focusing on profits.

When I graduate and get a job in industry I most probably will start paying for Dropbox and remove my files from other free services such as Google Drive or syncplicity but for the moment, I can't justify 12.99 AUD a month.