Glide Maker plan (Unlimited User)

Is it true that only Maker plan has unlimited user and there’s no extra charge of it while the business and Team plan still need to pay for the extra user?

what if I want the glide API , Call API and also want the unlimited user for no charge?
I’m confused , please help me

There is no single plan that offers this combination.

1 Like

This :point_up_2:
But I must also add that from what I have seen in the community, the Glide team is willing to listen to your requirements in terms of what you need for your plan which is not already there and they will advise accordingly.

I must also say that these plans have been structured such that each plan caters for a particular type of client and not necessarily the agent (the developer). The challenge comes where we have been so used to plans that were structured around the developer and that meant we could service more clients with only 1 plan. Now the game has changed and we also have to change our thinking as devs. Be more efficient and more importantly smart in how we market the value that we bring to the client. These new plans are slowly growing into me but only time will tell…

That’s probably where you’ve been doing it wrong. What is recommended is that each client should purchase their own plan from Glide.

1 Like

What do you mean “recommended”?

On the old plan, if I am running an agency and have an enterprise plan, what would have been wrong with creating multiple Apps for different clients and then billing those clients on a monthly basis? Of course this is on the old plans.
What would have been the point of being able to create unlimited Apps in a plan?

“Unlimited” plans still have limits applied to the entire team folder. What if you have 20 clients and one of them decides to go nuts and exceeds one of the plan limits? All of a sudden they’ve brought down 19 of your other clients.


Its possible as you say but that could still happen even if those clients are on different plans…

Let me try and explain it this way…

There are different types of users that work with this tool called Glide and I fall into the category that does not allow Glide access to my client and rather I am the client to Glide. My prospective clients and clients do not know that the solution was built with Glide hence from the onset I have always been an advocate for white-labelling…I think maybe that is the fundamental difference here.
I take Glide, create the solution and sell the solution to the client and I do the heavy lifting of worrying about the tech used for that solution without the client having to worry about where the solution came from or how it was built.

Recommended as in this is what Glide recommends to all Experts and Agencies.

Of course, you are free to build and host Apps for your clients in your own team if that’s what you want to do, but it is a risky way to run your business.


Maybe it’s because I am not yet part of the inner circle hence I missed the recommendation… :hugs:

How could different clients affect each other if they were on different plans? If your plan exceeds the limit, it doesn’t affect my apps because we are on different plans. We are completely isolated from each other.


You should join the Experts program, then you can start getting revenue share. Andy provided details in his recent update on pricing.


What I meant was a client who has their own plan can still reach a limit of that plan and the App lock them out with the message that the App has reached its limit. This is of course with the same thinking that I just explained above that I don’t sell Glide as a tool but rather the packaged solution…

I do however get what you are saying and that is exactly what the new plans are actually forcing all of us to think about now whether I like it or not hence I made a point to say, I have had to change my approach to working with these plans…

1 Like

I will have to seriously look into this, it looks interesting :thinking:

1 Like

@Luther What you’re saying is correct; it’s a valid approach to work. I believe that setting up an agency and investing money in a tool like Glide, whether in a team or business plan to create applications for clients, is a good idea. One can decide how to sell their work, which is worth a lot of money in some instances, without necessarily burdening the client with the issues or costs of Glide directly. You can sell the final solution without bringing additional problems or costs that the client doesn’t need to be aware of. One must know how to control usage and avoid abuses, and there are many ways to do that. I think with a team plan, you can have 20 happy clients, and if they need more users later on, you can charge an additional fee per user, thus growing your agency. You always have to start somewhere. It would be quite irrational to find a client and immediately convey the entire cost of the plan when it’s not necessary. Perhaps they only need a single app, and it’s a good business to sell a part. We are here to make money as well, or else we would be doing something else. Cheers!


I think what Jeff means is if clients of app A make your team exceed a certain team-level limit, then if affects clients of app B, app C, app D etc if you’re putting them on the same team. Is that what you’re doing?


@Jose_Ignacio @Luther


  • you build apps professionally (or for a fee) for clients
  • hide from your clients that Glide is the technical solution thanks to whitelabeling
  • leverage an affordable plan in your name to generate high revenue

Then I think we can agree that:

  • you are delivering high value to the market (“high revenue”)
  • Glide is not seeing any substantial share of this high value (the affordable plan is in your name)
  • you are benefitting from Glide much more than Glide is benefitting from you, and a corollary of this is that you are not an interesting partner to Glide if you pursue these practices.

You will argue that it’s not your fault if the plans encourage you to do this.

First, nobody needs to receive recommendations from anybody to set their own boundaries. Of course it’s smart business for you, but would you say it’s smart business for Glide? If not, why would they support it.

Second, Glide has changed its plans in part to also receive retribution for the value it provides the market and make sure abuses are reduced (or even not made possible). The plans seek to benefit everyone: the market (companies that need custom internal software), Glide itself, Glide partners that will build Glide apps and evangelize Glide. The key word here is balance.

Why would Glide be interested in seeing its platform deliver great value to the market and yet not reap the benefits, not even with branding?

As Darren suggested, joining the experts program might be a good option for you. It’s a program that fosters true partnership.

1 Like

@Luther Dear, here I see that you are trying to instill the idea that we developers should benefit Glide; however, that is not correct. The benefit should be ours because we pay for a platform to use for our development purposes. No service-selling company suggests that we should promote them before ourselves. Whether we are viewed positively by Glide is not the issue. We are here to run a profitable business, as long as Glide charges for what it sells, and as we mentioned, the price is not high but neither is it low.

So, as honest users who pay for a service without violating its policies, we can use it in the way that benefits us the most. The plans are well-limited to prevent any kind of abuse. If we can afford a plan of $125 or $300 per month to create applications for different clients, we can do it. I reiterate, we are not here to benefit Glide, but to work and become successful ourselves. Glide already charges for its service, ensuring its profits and growth with those revenues. This is why there is white labeling and other benefits that conceal the origin and technology of the solutions.


My perspective and focus are on ensuring that developers obtain significant benefits when using platforms like Glide. It is true that, as users who pay for a service, we have the right and expectation to make the most of the tool for our own benefit and that of our clients.

My point about the importance of white labeling and other benefits that allow developers to present solutions without revealing the origin or underlying technology is valid. This provides additional flexibility and the ability to build a distinct brand presence.

It is crucial to recognize that, as users, we play a fundamental role in the success of any platform, and it is valid to expect a substantial return on investment. Platforms, in turn, aim to provide competitive services and generate revenue for their continuous growth and development;



I fully understand what Jeff meant and yes you are correct, it is how I was using the previous plans. In the absence of regional discounts, I can’t afford to have each client on a separate plan otherwise Glide would not make sense for me as the creator of the solution.
Remember, as I create the solution, I am also fully aware of the usage in terms of updates and therefore can accurately estimate the usage of each solution. What Glide also introduced was the ability to track which App uses the most updates and the plan was to make each client pay extra for exceeding their updates allotment…
But all of that business model was thrown out of the window with these new plans because there is no easy way to upgrade to a higher tier plan. Each plan is more client specific rather than generic as was the case with the previous plans.
It was maybe part of the reason why some of the devs like myself were also so upset when the new plans were introduced because it meant going back to the drawing board in term of our business model. I have since changed my approach though and although I am still just testing the Free plan, I foresee useful applications for each of the plan and my plan is to use the Maker plan to finance the other plans. I am not saying though that my approach is ideal or the best but I am simply trying to see how to get the best out of my dollars…

1 Like

@Jose_Ignacio I think your response was meant for @nathanaelb not for myself…

1 Like

You could not be more wrong about these conclusions.

If anything, Glide has benefited from me learning to use the platform. So far, I paid for the starter plan just to be able to have access to some of the features.
I am in a process of building an ERP software and it has taken me a major part of 18 months. I have had to upgrade and downgrade between plans just to be able to have access to some of the features that are behind a paywall that Glide uses.
So for me all payments that I have made to Glide this far, have been so that I can sharpen my skills and be able to build solutions. It’s been tuition fees that I have been paying actually…

Having said that @nathanaelb I don’t really mind what you have concluded because at the end of it all, that is the plan, to see how I can best get the most out of Glide as a tool.

I am here to try and make money for the time I invest in learning the platform and the fee I pay to have access to using Glide and build the solutions that I am working on.

As for partnering with Glide, I have not thought about it extensively because Glide has not shown me that they want to partner with people from my background.
I am in South Africa and the value of our currency against the dollar is ~18-19. Each dollar is approx R19 and therefore when I pay $25 over to Glide just to learn or to build, it is a serious investment on my part not to mention the time spent on building that solution. If Glide is interested in being a Global company that wants to partner with devs from other parts of the world then an introduction of regional discounts would be a thing.
I also don’t think there is anything wrong with me putting my needs ahead of Glide as much as I want them to succeed. My contribution to their success at the moment is limited to the dollars I pay to have access to their platform. This is not to say this will not change in future because the more I work with the tool the better I get at it and will therefore have no qualms about disclosing the tool behind the solution.

1 Like