>Until this change, customers who have used fewer resources have covered the costs, in a way, for other customers who have used much more resources.
So... raising the prices for everybody instead?
They're only raising the prices of customers whose servers use more than a terabyte per month. Based on my experience, it's not easy to go over a terabyte of bandwidth for most web services. I doubt the majority of their customers will see any change in price.
Sucks to pay a dollar per terabyte extra if you're downloading a petabyte per month through your hetzner VPN, but this sure beats raising everyone's prices because two or three companies decided to use Hetzner to build a CDN.
This is why you can't offer unlimited anything, and why we can't have nice things.
> They're only raising the prices of customers whose servers use more than a terabyte per month.
It sure reads to me like they raised the base instance price across the board. The biggest increases will be for those using over the new included bandwidth (min 1tb) but they are going up for everyone.
> They're only raising the prices of customers whose servers use more than a terabyte per month.
No they're not? AFAICT if I made a CPX11 using 0.1TB/mo, my price just went from 3.85 to 4.49.
Yeah, I really don't understand that part of the message. It'd make sense if they were lowering prices elsewhere, but now they just... raise them? I seriously don't see how that benefits _anyone_ except Hetzner.
What likely happened here is that they were raising prices due to increased costs for energy and various other costs, and if they hadn't made this change then they would have had to increase the price more, so relative to that it keeps it cheaper for low-traffic customers - and they just communicated this poorly.
Yeah, the justification given makes absolutely no sense - you are paying more than before even if you stay under the new limit (which is 1/20th of the original!)
They also use the word "tariff" several times without elaborating, as if the person who wrote the email doesn't know the actual meaning of the word.
Seems like intentional deception to hide a standard "we just want more money" price raise.
> as if the person who wrote the email doesn't know the actual meaning of the word.
In my country, "tariff" is seen in several contexts:
* A tax on imports, much in the news since the recent US election.
* A pub or bar's price list is known as the "bar tariff"
* Energy companies offer a selection of "tariffs" i.e. agreed contract rates for usage-based pricing. e.g. a 3-year-fixed-price tariff, a 100%-green-energy tariff, and so on.
* The portion of a 'life' jail sentence which must be served, before a prisoner can be considered for parole.
So I don't think it's incorrect to call a price list a "tariff", merely unusual.
Right, only the first usage is mainstream American English. The others are not.
I am curious if the others are British English? Or Indian? Other?
> So I don't think it's incorrect to call a price list a "tariff"
I'm pretty sure it is in American English. That usage might be ok in British English, but for Americans that terminology is going to be confusing. Before today, I had never heard tariff used for anything other than import taxes. And since this applies to servers in the US, it would make sense not to use terminology that would be confusing to people in that country.
From what I can tell, in the US energy suppliers talking to one another use the term "tariff" like for example https://www.puc.texas.gov/industry/electric/rates/tdr.aspx
Whereas when talking to consumers they seem to use terms like 'rate' and 'plan'.
as if the person who wrote the email doesn't know the actual meaning of the word.
The word "tariff" has a few different meanings. I'd say they're using it correctly, just not with the same meaning that the word is commonly being used in the news right now.
In Germany "phone plan" is written as the literal translation of "mobile radio tariff", as a bundle of price and terms.
So it's not unexpected to use the uncommon in English meaning of the word to describe these changes.
Tariff can simply mean "fee". Don't be so proud of your ignorance.
It's not used that way in American English at all; it almost borders on archaic. Given the purpose of this email was to primarily let their American customers know they'd be raising prices on them, it seems unfair to tell someone they're ignorant when they were sent a message containing verbiage that has entirely different meaning to them.
"We just want more money" Is the standard operating procedure and the goal of all for-profit companies. How can hackers not understand this? Of course they will always want as much money as possible, and it is up to you as a customer to decide if their product is worth what they are asking or if you will go to a competitor.
Because hackers are individual human beings, and as such are motivated by a whole variety of reasons, money being just one of them.
When running small companies they still tend to be motivated by other things, such as proving a point, achieving a technical goal or having some cultural influence etc.
It's only when the company grows in size that it becomes this soulless greedy sociopath we are all too accustomed to.
Hetzner grew a lot those last 5 years or so.
> It's only when the company grows in size that it becomes this soulless greedy sociopath we are all too accustomed to.
Most small and medium size businesses also fit this description. And I don't consider a price hike to be sociopathic or soulless. Greedy, sure. But businesses are always profit focused first and foremost.