We are a small shop that has 4 repositories and 36 users (over half the company).  About 10 of those users actually contribute code, the others are monitoring issues, pulling code just to run tests or create distributions, or bots.<p>If we accidentally hit the upgrade button (we won&#x27;t), our cost would go from 300&#x2F;year to 3,648&#x2F;year.   Since only a small number of projects are on github - we use TFS for our main project and github for tools - its just a non-starter.<p>Heck, 5 &quot;bot accounts&quot; is $540&#x2F;year to support CI builds and slack notifications.   Yikes! More than we pay now.<p>It seems like the only shop that would save money would be the little in-house development departments with 5 people and tons of projects.   However, even there they would probably forego using issues tracking in github because of the extra user cost.<p>I would be very interested to see real stats on how many orgs actually &quot;upgrade&quot; to this new more expensive pricing model vs how many stay with the more sane model.   The real losers are orgs that can&#x27;t sign up under the old model.   The real winners will be the github alternatives (gitlab, bitbucket, etc) that can use this as an opportunity to grow user base.