Comment by shubhamjain

Comment by shubhamjain 3 days ago

101 replies

> Additionally, there's plenty of "Upgrade to Pro" buttons sprinkled about. It's the freemium model at work.

I don't think they care much about few "Pro" upgrades here and there. The real money, and their focus as a company, is in enterprise contracts. Note that, Matthew Prince, the CEO, had outlined a few reasons why they have such a generous free tier on an Stack Exchange answer[1]. I think the biggest reason is this:

> Bandwidth Chicken & Egg: in order to get the unit economics around bandwidth to offer competitive pricing at acceptable margins you need to have scale, but in order to get scale from paying users you need competitive pricing. Free customers early on helped us solve this chicken & egg problem. Today we continue to see that benefit in regions where our diversity of customers helps convince regional telecoms to peer with us locally, continuing to drive down our unit costs of bandwidth.

Cloudflare had decided long ago that they wanted to work at an incredible scale. I would actually be very interested in understanding how this vision came to be. Hope Matthew writes that book someday.

[1]: https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/a/88685.

mdasen 3 days ago

I think there are a few other benefits (even if that was the main benefit/driving force behind the decision).

When you have low-paying (or zero-paying) customers, you need to make your system easy. When you're enterprise-only, you can pay for stuff like dedicated support reps. A company is paying you $1M+/year and you hire someone at $75,000 who is dedicated to a few clients. Anything that's confusing is just "Oh, put in a chat to Joe." It isn't the typical support experience: it's someone that knows you and your usage of the system. By contrast, Cloudflare had to make sure that its system was easy enough to use that free customers would be able to easily (cheaply) make sense of it. Even if you're going to give enterprise customers white-glove service, it's always nice for them when systems are easy and pleasant to use.

When you're carrying so much free traffic, you have to be efficient. It pushes you to actually make systems that can handle scale and diverse situations without just throwing money at the problem. It's easy for companies to get bloated/lazy when they're fat off enterprise contracts - and that isn't a good recipe for long-term success.

Finally, it's a good way to get mindshare. I used Cloudflare for years just proxying my personal blog that got very little traffic. When my employer was thinking about switching CDNs, myself and others who had used Cloudflare personally kinda pushed the "we should really be looking at Cloudflare." Free customers may never give you a dollar - but they might know someone or work for someone who will give you millions. Software engineers love things that they can use for free and that has often paid dividends for companies behind those free things.

  • nindalf 3 days ago

    I built my website on Cloudflare Pages and ended up using basically their entire suite of tools - Pages, D1, Analytics, Rules, Functions. The DX was pretty good because all of these features worked well together.

    Cloudflare offered all of this for free because it gets them positive mentions (like the one you’re reading right now) and they’re educating a bunch of developers on their entire product portfolio. And what does it cost to host my blog that 1000-2000 views a month? Literally nothing.

    • mentalgear 2 days ago

      This approach is good as long as the tech stack is open source and portable to other platforms. Otherwise, no matter how good a company/CEO seems ATM, you are ultimately at their mercy if they decide to raise prices significantly.

      By using an open, interoperable tech stack, you maintain the freedom to switch to another cloud provider at will.

      This shared fluid power also creates a compelling reason for cloud providers to remain honest and competitive in their dealings with customers.

      • nindalf 2 days ago

        You don't get it.

        For most companies free users are just a source of potential paid customers. Such companies squeeze the free users to force them to upgrade. For Cloudflare the millions of free users strengthen their negotiating power with ISPs around the world. We provide value to Cloudflare just by being Cloudflare customers. It is possible that Cloudflare might get a CEO who doesn't understand this, but possible doesn't mean likely.

        In any case, I've built my website with Astro, pulling in the Cloudflare integration as a dependency. If I wanted to switch to Vercel or Netlify or whatever else, Astro makes it easy. As for database, others offer managed Sqlite.

        If all else fails, I'll ditch the few dynamic parts of the website and deploy the bulk of the site as static html to Github Pages or something.

    • Moru 2 days ago

      I have been bitten many times by this usage of free stuff that suddenly starts to cost money so it took a while before I dared to use cloudflare. Have been using it for a few years now without any surprise bills so still happy. Hope I didn't jinx it now. :-)

      • nindalf 2 days ago

        Think it'll stay the same as long as the CEO (Prince) and CTO (Graham-Cumming) stay in place. Policies might change with a change of leadership, but even then I don't consider it likely.

  • ljm 3 days ago

    I feel like there might be an additional motivation too, which is that this investment in a better internet (free SSL for everyone before LetsEncrypt came around, generous free tiers for users, etc. etc.) means that Cloudflare builds a reputation of being a steward of the ecosystem while also benefitting indirectly from wider adoption of good, secure practices.

    In some ways it's analogous to investing in your local community and arguably paying tax: it's rare that you would directly and personally benefit from this, but if the environment you live in improves from it, crime is reduced, more to do, etc. then you can enjoy a better quality of life.

    • ipaddr 3 days ago

      Have they made a better internet? Many would say that made it worse.

      • Ayesh 3 days ago

        > made it worse.

        I'd say this too. I'm giving LetsEncrypt 100% credit for making HTTPS so ubiquitous and free.

        But CloudFlare certainly made things worse for "webmaster" era of the Internet, with everything centralized to CloudFlare. I live in Vietnam, and CloudFlare has made things super annoying with their captcha challenges everywhere.

        Credit where it's due, CloudFlare pushed HTTP/2 and 3 adoption. More websites are available over IPv6, and their 1.1.1.1 DNS is actually quite nice.

      • stubish 3 days ago

        Overall, certainly. There are some negative things people talk about that you might agree with, but look back at what the market was that they disrupted and continue to disrupt. I think that without Cloudflare your registrar would be GoDaddy and your SSL certificates would be from Verisign and your rents would be huge. Backbone wise, that would depend on your region.

      • danielheath 3 days ago

        I mean, maybe we would have found another solution to DDOS, but as someone who has had a pretty significant attack (on a service which is a clear public good) mitigated for free… it’s pretty nice being able to keep your services online in a hostile environment.

      • lostlogin 3 days ago

        I don’t know the history here, do you have some examples?

        My usage is pretty much limited to their DNS.

  • bentcorner 3 days ago

    Reminds me of the School -> Pro pipeline where companies sell cheaply or even give away their software to learning institutions so that students who go pro are familiar with their tools and then later recommend it for their work.

    • DaiPlusPlus 3 days ago

      That’s absolutely true for things like MS Office and Adobe - but it also works in the other direction: I’m sure making kids use Java for AP computer-science or for undergrad contributed to its uncool status today.

      • ninjha 3 days ago

        The two almost-contradictory takes I hold about this are…

        - Java is cool, actually

        - Java would be just as uncool even if people weren’t required to use it in school

      • mschuster91 3 days ago

        The problem for Java's "uncool status" isn't Java as a programming language, the JVM or its academic use IMHO, it rather is a consequence of large-enterprise culture.

        Large enterprise doesn't value "creativity" or any deviation from standards, but it does value plans and estimates - hence clueless, brainless "managers" and "architects" forced programmers to do absolutely insane bullshit busywork that a gang of monkeys on LSD could do, and that culture spread throughout the large-enterprise world.

        On top of that come "design by committee" stuff like CORBA, XML, SOAP, Java EE, Enterprise Beans and everything associated with this particular horror show, JDBC...

        You can do absolutely mind blowing stuff with Java and the JVM. But fuck corporate for torturing Java and the poor sods tasked with the busywork. Java got the image it has because programmers want to be creative but could not be so because their bosses were braindead.

    • Brian_K_White 3 days ago

      Autocad 10-12 back in college. Cost thousands of dollars in 80s/90s dollars, Not officially allowed to copy, but in reality effortless to copy and run at home for free.

      There were other products aiming to be just as good at the same time that were actually protected with dongles and such.

      The one that everyone could run at home is the one that took over the world.

      • taneq 3 days ago

        Same with Photoshop, and Windows, and plenty of others. Intentional or not, the ease of copying these products is what made them ubiquitous.

        • akoboldfrying 2 days ago

          I think Windows was ubiquitous because for a long time there was nothing else usable for Joe Average on PCs, and PCs were essentially the only game in town until Apple got its act together.

  • fheisler 3 days ago

    This is exactly our thinking with authentik (open source IdP), and it's played out in practice so far. Enterprise sales conversations are so much easier when they start with "we all use you in our homelabs already." We're much more focused on giving those individual users a positive early experience (in hopes that some small percentage will really pay off down the road) than in extracting a few dollars from each of them.

    • CWuestefeld 2 days ago

      I had this exact conversation with a Cloudflare rep a year or two ago, after I told her how I user their free DNS service. She said, "that free service was the best thing we ever did". And we wound up buying their bot management and DDOS services.

ndiddy 3 days ago

> I don't think they care much about few "Pro" upgrades here and there. The real money, and their focus as a company, is in enterprise contracts.

Cloudflare's enterprise customer acquisition strategy seems to be offering free or extremely cheap flat-rate plans with "no limits", then when a customer gets a sizeable amount of traffic they will try to sell them an enterprise plan and cut them off if they don't buy (see https://robindev.substack.com/p/cloudflare-took-down-our-web...). IMO this is pretty shrewd, as it means that companies can't do real price comparisons between Cloudflare and other CDNs until they already have all their infrastructure plugged into Cloudflare.

  • ganoushoreilly 3 days ago

    That particular story / case had a lot more context to it that we weren't given. I wouldn't be ready to place any kind of merit on it without hearing more. I also think given the OP's industry it's likely there were issues with IP reputation. Could it have been handled differently? Probably. In this case I think it would have been smarter to just part ways upfront and let the client know it's not going to work out. I suspect the contract was designed to say.. we don't see the value in this relationship.. but at this price we'll make it work type deal. I don't think that's the right way to go, but I hardly believe this is how they operate.

    I've used their free -> enterprise services in multiple companies and clients. Haven't had a single bad experience with them yet. Always helpful, if a bit delayed at times.

    • ndiddy 3 days ago

      It doesn't seem like Cloudflare has any problems with online gambling, especially since the first email the author got from Cloudflare came from someone in their "Gaming & iGaming" division. There's people in this thread in other industries who have had similar experiences with them.

      IMO the biggest problems are how Cloudflare kept inventing excuses like "issues with account settings" to get the customer on the phone with their sales team, and the mixing of "trust and safety" with sales (like deleting their account for ToS violations after the CEO mentioned talking to a competing CDN).

      • eastdakota 2 days ago

        No problem with gaming & gambling where it’s legal. Lots of problems where 1) it’s illegal; and 2) a customer sets up lots of free accounts to get around local ISP blocks and gets big ranges of our IPs blocked causing significant collateral damage to other customers who share the IPs. In that case we will ask the customer to switch to a solution which requires them to bring their own IP addresses. And because that takes much more bespoke support, we charge for it.

      • ganoushoreilly 3 days ago

        I don't know that I can trust the perspective of the Op here. Gaming and Gambling aren't the same thing. We don't know that they invented excuses here either. I would also suspect the comment about a competing CDN was used by the OP to try and gain leverage and it failed.

        All i'm saying is we can't make a determination of right and wrong without more data. All things considered, it reads more to me that the data withheld is on the original OP side rather than the CF side.

        Either way, it's a unique one off. Most of the mentions in this thread of this behavior all rely on this one experience. I think that in of itself is probably a positive on the side of cloudflare. If it were institutional that they treat clients like this we would hear it regularly.

  • vasco 3 days ago

    Yep, and if you contact their sales directly because you've been bitten before and tell them your traffic they will be happy to tell you that yes, other than a short trial you have to pay them for huge bandwidth from month one. It's actually surprising to me people would believe it's fully free. Like think for a bit that if that was the case Netflix would just move to Cloudflare free tier and Cloudflare would go bankrupt immediately.

    • jgrahamc 3 days ago

      Like think for a bit that if that was the case Netflix would just move to Cloudflare free tier and Cloudflare would go bankrupt immediately.

      Cloudflare's free tier specifically excludes video. See https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-applicatio...:

      Content Delivery Network (Free, Pro, or Business) Cloudflare’s content delivery network (the “CDN”) Service can be used to cache and serve web pages and websites. Unless you are an Enterprise customer, Cloudflare offers specific Paid Services (e.g., the Developer Platform, Images, and Stream) that you must use in order to serve video and other large files via the CDN. Cloudflare reserves the right to disable or limit your access to or use of the CDN, or to limit your End Users’ access to certain of your resources through the CDN, if you use or are suspected of using the CDN without such Paid Services to serve video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other large files. We will use reasonable efforts to provide you with notice of such action.

      • jsheard 3 days ago

        Replace Netflix with Reddit in that hypothetical then, would they be allowed to serve their substantial non-video traffic through the free tier? If so, you have to wonder why they choose to pay for Fastly instead.

      • Scaevolus 3 days ago

        Does this apply to caching R2 with the free tier CDN?

        The R2 overview page explicitly lists "Storage for podcast episodes", but a podcast host under the free tier would serve a disproportionate percentage of audio files.

      • JonoBB 3 days ago

        What about hosting video on R2 and using the CDN?

      • benatkin 3 days ago

        Frankly it’s none of y’alls beeswax what medium of content I’m deploying. I can understand restrictions on illegal and offensive content. I won’t be using Cloudflare if including a file or even putting some base64 in my html file will be a ToS violation.

        It's these petty restrictions that make these pricing policies convenient, and it hurts the market :(

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy) https://pricecontrol.biz/en/dumping-from-a-to-z/

      • vasco 3 days ago

        Well bad example, but as someone else said, replace with any other large non video service. I'm not making this up, I had calls with sales. And like I said, I don't think this is surprising, it's like "infinite bandwidth" deals from ISPs and phone data plans, etc. It's a reasonable expectation that you'd have to pay at some threshold.

  • pc86 3 days ago

    I haven't heard about this in particular but based entirely on your depiction here it sounds more like fraud to me.

    If I was paying a flat rate for a no limit plan, that company tried to sell me an Enterprise plan which I declined, then they cut me off, we'd be in court as soon as the clerk would schedule it.

    • jamespo 3 days ago

      If you were rotating IPs against the TOS I don't think you'd have a leg to stand on

      • pc86 3 days ago

        The GP doesn't mention anything about rotating IPs

        • NicoJuicy 3 days ago

          I think he is saying that the customer, a casino. Had a dubious legal status in different countries. They are often banned.

          Cloudflare doesn't want their IP's (rotating) to be affected so advised bring your own IP, which is an Enterprise feature.

  • NicoJuicy 3 days ago

    I remember this story and it missed the entire point.

    The customer ( a casino) was using dubious actions in different countries which impacted Cloudflare's IP trust. Tldr: Cloudflare didn't want an IP ban in their IP's due to government regulation.

    The fix was to bring their own IP which is an Enterprise feature, as they weren't allowed to use Cloudflare's IPs anymore.

AnthonyMouse 3 days ago

> Bandwidth Chicken & Egg: in order to get the unit economics around bandwidth to offer competitive pricing at acceptable margins you need to have scale, but in order to get scale from paying users you need competitive pricing. Free customers early on helped us solve this chicken & egg problem.

I'm not really sure how this works.

Suppose you have paying customers and for that you need X amount of bandwidth. If you add a bunch of free customers then you need X + Y bandwidth. But the price of X + Y is never going to be lower than the price of X, is it? So even if the unit cost is lower, the total cost is still higher and you haven't produced any additional revenue in exchange, so how can this produce any net profit?

  • bauruine 3 days ago

    If you send 10Gbit/s to an ISP you have to pay for transit to reach it. But if you send 100Gbit/s+ the ISP suddenly is willing to not only peer for free with you but may even host the servers for you in their data center for free. [0][1][2] So yes being bigger can absolutely save you costs.

    [0]: https://www.cloudflare.com/partners/peering-portal/

    [1]: https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/

    [2]: https://support.google.com/interconnect/answer/9058809?hl=en

    • YetAnotherNick 3 days ago

      Can't you just send random generated packets. Or by requesting content from other hosting provider with free or cheap egress. Or sending to another hosting provider.

      • gr3ml1n 2 days ago

        Sending random packets at another AS just results in your traffic being blocked. The network engineers running these systems are smart, and the community is surprisingly small.

  • Ugohcet 3 days ago

    The thing with ISPs is the small guys are more likely to have to pay, and the smaller you are the more likely you are to pay more.

    If you are a Tier 1 ISP, everyone is willing to pay you to carry their traffic and other Tier 1s just make peering agreements with you.

    If you're johnscheapvps.com, you're likely to pay all your upstream ISPs for your traffic. If you're GCP or, say, digitalocean.com, everyone would love to be paying you to get faster access to all the sites hosted on your platform (and because paying you is probably going to be cheaper than their regular upstream)

  • laverya 3 days ago

    Imagine you're an ISP. If your customer has slow bandwidth to some random website, they will blame the website. If they have a slow connection to YouTube, they will blame you.

    So YouTube gets more favorable terms on transit bandwidth than the random site does.

  • mugsie 3 days ago

    it may be, especially if the ISP in question just does direct peering with you, your unit cost can drop to ~ $0/MB, and you stop paying Cogent/Verizion/HE unit cost for facilitating the connection from you to the ISP.

    Works for the ISP too, one off cost for them to drop there side of the bill down

  • chippiewill 3 days ago

    The point is that that you get your paid offering down to a lower price point because you have the volume to get the cheaper peering deals. Because your paid offering is cheap you get even more volume from paying customers which offsets the loss you made.

DrBenCarson 3 days ago

And this works IME

I use Cloudflare for hobby projects 90% of the time because it’s free. That dramatically increases the likelihood I advocate for their offerings in the enterprise

crowcroft 3 days ago

It's a very elegant business strategy because you have one clear focus (handle loads of bandwidth), but it can be expressed in so many ways (DNS/Caching, object storage, video delivery/streaming, static site hosting).

uncertainrhymes 3 days ago

I've always wondered if there is an accounting benefit for them. Can the free tier be charged as 'marketing'? No idea how you would internally break up the costs, but it could make your margins look better.

speleding 2 days ago

Another likely reason: the process of metering bandwidth accurately enough to use as input for a billing process costs money. On their distributed setup it's probably seriously expensive to do accurate bandwidth metering per site. Probably more expensive than they expect to make by pricing bandwidth.

mcmcmc 3 days ago

The hidden purpose of a free tier is to discourage competition

  • bluedino 2 days ago

    Expand on this please?

    • mcmcmc 2 days ago

      Let’s say you’re looking to break into the Fun as a Service market. The incumbent offers 100 hours of Fun per year as a free service and charges enterprise prices above that. If you want to start a Fun as a Service competitor, to have any chance of competing for new signups you also have to front 100 hours/year for anyone who wants to try it at a 100% loss, before you can even start making money.

      It’s the same principle behind predatory pricing, which is illegal but rarely enforced. The goal is to make it too expensive for new players to enter the market, or to force existing competitors out.

NicoJuicy 3 days ago

That's not the complete story.

Cloudflare's main income is DDOS, which is incoming traffic they pay for.

They pay for that pipeline (which you pay for up and down traffic), so they have a generous free CDN because they already pay for it.

( Unrelated to workers, ... )

nickcw 3 days ago

I think this is the important part

> Today we continue to see that benefit in regions where our diversity of customers helps convince regional telecoms to peer with us locally, continuing to drive down our unit costs of bandwidth

If you can peer your traffic you can send it for free.

So lots of small customers, despite not paying anything, is helping to reduce bandwidth costs for Cloudflare to zero.

If they've reduced bandwidth costs to zero then they can afford to give it away for free.

I can tell you from personal experience that getting some ISPs to peer with you is hard unless you are exchanging lots of traffic already.

This is a clever playbook that has made Cloudflare a tier 1 ISP in an age when that is extremely difficult.