Pay Limited users for Jira Portfolio?
Asked by Hua Ji:

Hi Jiraporfolio team, for the pricing, I have one question, if our company have 500 users on Jira but only 20 of them need to use portfolio, is that possible to pay for limited users?


Answers:
author: Nick McLoughlan
body: Same problem for us.

What alternatives are people using?

comments: author: Jeroen Olthof
body: Same here. Until licenses model is changed, we need to search for alternatives. Any recommendations? Anyone?


author: Hisham
body: Same thing here, not everybody will benefit from the portfolio, only few managers, I don't know if the pricing model still the same?

comments: author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: No change


author: Mick Might
body: How disappointing. I won't be trialling Portfolio because of this, since there is no way I can convince my finance director to pay for 100 licenses when only a handful of people will use Portfolio.


author: Daniel Santos
body: Hello Hua,

You can get most of the information you need from: <https://www.atlassian.com/licensing/jira-portfolio>

Here is the answer that Nic already gave to you: <https://www.atlassian.com/licensing/jira-portfolio#serverlicenses-5>

comments: author: DavidKWright
body: Still true that portfolio license count # needs to be same as JIRA license count # (asking 2 years later)? We have less than 25 users on a team that would benefit from portfolio, but have a 500 user JIRA?


author: David Cumps
body: Wondering the same, everyone in our company has a JIRA user but only a few managers need the portfolio.

Because of the pricing, we are unable to purchase it and have to look for alternatives.


author: Adri?n Ram?rez Altarejos
body: This is obviously what most companies are requesting from Portfolio, i don't know if it still works like that but it looks that most of their market would choose it as an option if only we could have less than 50 licenses in a 200+ users environment. Trying to match it with the number of core licenses is just against its own logic.

A read only posibility would be logical also, but having every user with rights to create and modify roadmaps just doesn't make sense.


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: No, you need to licence it at the same level as the core JIRA product.

comments: author: Thomas Kahnoski
body: Huge bummer. This would be an easy sell at my company if not for this. I wish they'd charge more for less users. Or go with a tiered read-only type user and then a write access user.


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: I suspect Portfolio may move to become an "application", like Service Desk or Software, and then you would be able to do different user levels. But I don't have any more info on that than you do. Just a feeling


author: Daniel Santos
body: This is what we have now:"For JIRA Server 7.0 or later, the add-on tier should match the maximum tier of the licensed JIRA applications on your instance. For example, if you're running JIRA Software (50 users) and JIRA Service Desk (10 agents) on the same instance, you should purchase the 50-user tier for add-ons."Reference: <https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.radiantminds.roadmaps-jira> -\> Picing tab


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: Yes. As I already implied Portfolio is an add-on, not an application, so it needs to follow the Core licence level. (Until, as I suspect, it becomes an application, which will then be licenced as an application)


author: Fabrizio Galletti
body: @nic please no!!!! if atlassian start to change addon to application a lot of customer will search other solutions.


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: I think you're missing the background of what an "application" is in this context.JIRA 7 split JIRA into three products - Core, Software and Service Desk. They're being marketed as separate products, but what they \*really\* are is:JIRA CoreJIRA Software = JIRA Core with the Software Application installedJIRA Service Desk = JIRA Core with the Service Desk Application installedApplications are the new feature for JIRA 7 - they're JIRA Applications that run within Core. Not separately. An incorrect, but simple and useful way to think of them is "A different type of add-on". Service Desk and Software used to be add-ons, but now they're Applications. But still JIRA applications.I can't think of a single reason why a Portfolio customer would go elsewhere just because it changes from an add-on to an application. The move would have some benefits in terms of cost and flexibility for some users, and absolutely zero downsides.


author: Fabrizio Galletti
body: ...and you will continue to pay as a "core features" so for all users.the only plugin (provided by atlassian) that has a different license type is "service desk" but they have created a lot of bloking permission and features to create something similar of other "pay per use" system.A lot of users complain about plugin costs, because plugin are related to product license tier. If you want to add a small features to jira, you will have to pay it for all users...Service desk is different because has a different target (people outside system) and usually product like this one (zendesk ..etc) has a license not related o end users(This is my opnion as a user)


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: No, that's still a bit wrong. Please read my previous comment.


author: Fabrizio Galletti
body: i still don't like it :) read my prev comment :)


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: I wasn't saying anything about liking it. I'd prefer it to become an application. I was just pointing out that what you'd written was incorrect


author: Brad Giotes
body: It's a shame you price it this way. My company has a 250 user license and we only currently have about 106 users. There is no way I can even ask my company to spend $6000 for a tool 3-4 people will use. I won't even waste my time evaluating. ...such a shame.


author: Nic Brough -Adaptavist-
body: Atlassian price it that way, not us - we're end-users, like you.  

If you're only having 3-4 people using Portfolio from a 100 user base, that's telling me that it's not something you really need. So I'd skip it. I totally agree with you - for a couple of people who might benefit, it's not worth it as the rest of you won't!


author: Samantha Sieverling
body: Hi All,

Only three to four people using Portfolio sounds about right for a 100 person user base. It will only be used by a couple of Project Managers and Product Owners to create road maps and to show progress to the exec through reports, so the cost is pretty prohibitive.

Feeling sad about being forced to license for all our users for several products that I would love to use, but once you add three or four of these items, suddenly you go from 1K to 6K and that puts these products out of range and we have to choose which one's are the highest priority.

What a shame.

Samantha


author: Luqman Moosa
body: We have 50 ppl on JIRA only 4 use it really don't see the point of paying so much.


Tags: advanced-roadmaps

licence

user