I would like to understand why Figma is using such a sophisticated, misleading, simply a sharp practice of billing their services?
I am a freelance start-up that has been charged for 8 other people accessing the file I have created. I have allowed access only for two of them and they shared further (probably) and I have been charged an additional $120 for their access.
I was never alerted to the fact that apart from the monthly subscription, there will be additional charges.
I donât want to be a part of a service that is so wishy-washy in their billing offer. It is a disgusting practice. Probably I will look for alternatives to this service.
Yeah I have the same problem and just contacted support to explain to me once and for all how Figma pricing f#$%ing works. Itâs hard enough evangelizing Figma to my team as the only designer, let alone have to explain that they can only have 24 hr access to a fig jam file (which they all laugh at rightly so) and then if one of the devs or marketing wants temporary editing rights during a presentation or something then I have to say no sorry we will immediately get charged $5 which they roll their eyes at and I donât blame them.
Figma is awesome but the pricing is absolute madness. Shows you the difference between how designers and sales/management contribute to a companyâs user experience
I loved Figjam so much I purchased a license so that I could work on a project from my work computer and my home devices. I wonder if this means Iâll be getting charged for that.
So I got a reply from Figma âsupportâ and they said that if you allow âViewerâ users the âEditorâ role then you donât have to pay for them if you downgrade them back to âViewerâ before your monthly billing cycle ends.
I think that means that if you pay for a yearly subscription, and you only have 1 editor, then you wonât be charged any monthly fees unless you make any viewers an editor as you go from the end of your monthly billing cycle into the next (28th June into 29th June - assuming your monthly billing cycle ends on 28th of each month.) so to avoid a monthly fee, you could make 10 viewers into Editors for the entire month but then remember to downgrade them to Viewers just before the 28th of the month. Then on the 29th, you can make them all Editors again.
Seems childish in a way and I am sure figma will re-invent this billing method soon since it is kinda hacky.
@Thereal I assume that if you bought a FigJam license you will be charged $5 per month for each Editor in FigJam. Remember that billable Editors are only users that have the Editor status as you move from one monthly billing cycle into the next. You canât avoid paying $5 per month for yourself, but if you add editors, make sure you make them Viewers just before your billing cycle ends then reinstate them as Editors during the next cycle etcâŚ
We are running into the same thing. No way to default users to restricted view unless you buy âEnterpriseâ (Paywall) and Figma is hoping you donât notice and just bill you.
Recurring Billing practices can vary among different services, and itâs crucial for companies to be transparent about their charges. It might be a good idea to reach out to Figmaâs customer support to clarify the situation and express your concerns. They might be able to provide more information about the additional charges and help you find a resolution.
If you decide to explore alternatives, there are indeed other design and collaboration tools available that might better suit your needs and billing preferences. Itâs essential to find a service that aligns with your expectations and budget.
Remember that many services value feedback from their users, and your input could help them improve their billing and communication processes in the future.
I think this is really sketchy too. We have a big problem managing editor upgrades on the org tier, and for what that tier costs that feature should not be restricted to enterprise. Yes, I can set new users to restricted accounts still, but I have to catch them and do it manually. Also Figma makes it a little too easy to upgrade yourself to an editor for both Figma and FigJam. This has always stood out to me as a super shady practice in an otherwise wonderful company that I generally respect and appreciate. And Iâve never seen them address one of these questions directly when they come up (at least that Iâm aware of).
Yeah - I just got a surprise bill as well. I signed up for a Team account and then started to add users. Some Editors, some Viewer, with no pop-up or alert that Editors would trigger additional billing. The invoice doesnât even list who is an Editor and you have to go through each project to sort it out. Itâs very deceptive and borderline illegal.
In that case, Figmaâs pricing page makes it very clear that you have to pay for every editor you add to your plan. My main issue is that they make it way too easy to become an editor, or for current editors plan to add more editors without any warnings that it will affect billing. I think they do this in the name of lowering barriers to collaboration but there is the side affect that it generates additional revenue for them and that has always felt sneaky to me. Even if they issue refunds, or donât bill if you remove the editor in time, it puts the burden 100% on the plan manager. Even just clicking the very obvious and enticing FigJam call to action in the product makes you into a FigJam editor an incurs a charge. They also have this call to action in their twitter bio, where itâs not even clear that a new FigJam file will be created just by clicking it.
This is also frustrating when I am a freelancer who collaborates with other freelancers who also pay for Figma on their own. If I share a file with them and we both have our own paid accounts, do I then double-pay for them to collaborate with me?
If Iâm trying to give them every benefit of the doubt that they are doing this in the name of lowering barriers to collaboration, then I have a hard time rationalizing it as that if they give the Enterprise version the ability to prevent it.
As for making it too easy to become an editor⌠that statement presumes the user understand what an editor is and that they arenât one yet. There is absolutely no indication to the user what-so-ever that by clicking the New design file or New FigJam button that theyâve just added a monthly charge to their organizations bill. And frankly it doesnât matter that an admin can go in retroactively and downgrade the role.
Even this is not as straight forward as they make it seem. Just downgrade the users⌠But if these users have created content and or shared designs by the time you figure out theyâve been an editor, downgrading them will have disruptive consequences to the content theyâve created.
I can honestly say that iâve never seen a piece of software that allows users to elevate their own abilities like this. And especially not one where a cost is incurred with no indication to the user.
Just got an unexpected invoice on the Figma Pro plan for FigJam seats. Didnât realise it was A) $25 extra cost on to of the Figma Pro plan we are on and B) going to cost so much just for a few flow charts.
Cancelled all the team FigJam access and we wonât use it outside of âDraftsâ where it doesnât cost.
This happened to me. I have a paid Pro acct, and a coworker of mine has a paid Pro account of her own. She made our whole team Editors on her FigJam board months ago. When I got my surprise bill for adding 2 editors to one of my files, I warned her to go check. Because if Figma is getting money from her for adding me as an editor on her file, AND they are also collecting money from me for having my own paid seat, then YES, THEY ARE DOUBLE-DIPPING, and Iâm pretty sure this is illegal.
The ability for people to assign themselves a Figma or FigJam editor seat is absolutely unacceptable. This isnât an enterprise level feature. Small to medium businesses need to be able to be in control of their costs â more than anyone else. Why anyone other than an admin should be allowed to affect billing is beyond me.
The fact that someone can click âeditâ without knowledge it will affect how much the company pays isnât good enough.
The âopt-outâ style of making someone a viewer-restricted isnât good enough.
It would be great if I was alerted ahead of time that whenever I was sharing Figjam documents with other people and adding them as editors, I was subscribing them to editing services and racking up my companies Figma bill. As is, the UI seems to indicate the service is free, however it most certainly is not!
We are actually getting rid of FigJam at our organization entirely because the billing practice and adding editors is so unclear. Itâs awful for businesses and managers who have to adhere to strict budgets each quarter.
Just wanted to add that this is bad practice and not transparent at all from Figma. It has really degraded my opinion of what is otherwise a great product, and leaves a poor impression. Itâs far to easy to get bill shock by editors accidentally creeping into billing. I can see now they have an âopen sessionâ feature, which is great and much appreciated, but itâs very easy to accidentally miss this and get a bill that doesnât align with value.
I just to have the same, this F%$#%& company It just to charge me 375$ for 25 editors, I am a freelancer and when I got the monthly payment thei show me a notifications alert about Editors. But when I stared to organiza files some editor had incluing, and I didnât realize, and Now Figma Steel me 375$ for my safesâŚ
Bad experiences
