Thank you for the great time together – I truly appreciated all we achieved.
Our cooperation was fruitful and built on mutual trust.
Unfortunately, the new pricing model became unsustainable for us
3 Likes
exactly, cursors pricing is better then v0’s new pricing, even if you bought extra credits, say you used 1500 a month on cursor, that’s still only $60 ish, I highly doubt you can get the same amount out of v0 now with this new pricing structure, it would cost you hundreds more, it just doesn’t economically make sense to use them anymore, other providers have lowered pricing or changed how tokens are used too, it seems like this new token usage model is chewing through peoples balances is a matter of hours, which makes it useless pretty much, it’s now more of a toy then an actual production code agent
1 Like
I was liking v0 but after this, I doubt if I will continue paying.
You know that sometimes chats break completely, code breaks, “Continue Generating”, “Stopped”, all of that will eventually consume more tokens for problems that should not occur, this change is bad tbh
2 Likes
I’ve just seen the announcement about v0’s shift to usage-based pricing, but honestly, I can’t even bring myself to care until the core platform actually works. As it stands today:
- Prompts no longer deliver the results they used to. What used to be reliable, predictable output is now a roll of the dice.
- The agent rewrites my code and reshuffles layouts without warning or consent. That’s not “helpful automation,” that’s hijacking my workflow.
- High-quality, battle-tested prompts are flat-out ignored. If it doesn’t fit some hidden new rubric, it just never runs.
Rolling out a new pricing model when the foundation is falling apart feels like putting lipstick on a pig. I strongly reject this direction: you need to restore reliable, transparent behavior before asking us to pay more for a product that currently doesn’t do what it promises.
Until these issues are addressed—prompt fidelity, no unauthorized code or layout changes, consistent output—I can’t support this new billing approach. Please fix the core experience first.
1 Like
I just completed what might be the most magnificent UI/UX draft design of my new website — a true digital symphony, forged through fire and feedback.
It wasn’t born perfect. No, this masterpiece was sculpted through thirty grueling iterations, each one a battle of pixels and purpose. Countless hours. Relentless tweaking. Until finally… it breathed.
And through it all, I was blessed — still under the message-based limit. A quiet guardian that allowed me to iterate freely, bound only by creativity, not cost.
But now, the winds shift.
If I were on usage-based pricing, I doubt I’d have made it beyond version 5 before the meter screamed, “Enough!”
v0 — my brave, beautiful, broken v0 — you were the sketch that started it all. You carried the weight of vision before the polish of perfection. I’ll miss you.
But the journey continues.
It’s time to move on.
Hello again. Cursor/Windsurf.
Sorry, not bolt because they are way behind.
2 Likes
Restore the previous pricing model immediately!!! Left on Friday, app was stable, returned on Monday, 20+ console errors, v0 significantly slowed down. What the heck is going on?
3 Likes
Dyad also does very successful work, friends, I am using dyad for now 
1 Like
good find! Will check it out
1 Like
Cancelled my subscription !
I literally have 0 knowledge about how to build , like Im a complete newbie when it comes to this and v0 has stood with me in this journey provided it being slow , crashing and being delusional sometimes , its okay as long as it was helping me build and ship .
But with their new pricing model i believe it dug its own grave . More than half of my credits went in correcting the wrong output it gave different to what i asked .
If anyone from v0 team is reading this , please help us help yourselves . We want to support v0 and vercel which is why I have taken subscriptions of both … but the new pricing is not it .
is the team looking into the outrage in the chat about the new model ?
I am waiting for their action so that I can resub again when I believe the 20 USD will be of good value .
2 Likes
Hi @nach, I moved your feedback here to the main discussion thread. Our team is listening to the feedback.
1 Like
It feels like a joke — as if we’re earning money too easily. Just a few revisions and $10 disappears. If we actually wanted to produce something serious, it seems like we’d have to spend around $2000 per month. v0.dev team, do you think we’re all rich? At this rate, a few teams will probably come together to develop an alternative system just to break free from the Vercel.com leash, and everyone will cancel their subscriptions. I loaded $100 just to test things out, and it’s vanishing after only 1–2 prompts. Once my balance is gone, I’ll be canceling my subscription.
2 Likes
Can’t you make it $40-$50, and keep the old pricing method?
7 Likes
Maybe you can do the same pricing as Cursor, I think it’s fair. If people don’t know how to prompt, it’s just not v0’s problem.
good scam v0, keep up the good work. You’ve already lost a lot of clients and are still losing them now. There are a lot of other AI projects besides you. which may even be a little more expensive in a monthly subscription, but there are no tokens and no collection of money like you did. You just decided to introduce your fucking rules to rob people. I’m disgusted by this!
With no plans for rollover credits. It’s time for me to move on. This will be way too expensive for me to continue building.
Maybe I’m not understanding how credits and tokens will work. It would be nice to know how many credits you get a month and how many credits will be taken for a large prompt and how we can get a refund of tokens or credits when your tool stops and fails draining our account for a product that only works on super simple tasks.
Not happy at all about this. My subscription renewed yesterday and I was put on credit based pricing. I am currently half way through the included $20 worth of credits. I will be looking for something new to use as this will be entirely too expensive for me. I would be willing to pay up to $50 a month for unlimited requests but I refuse to pay per request. You just lost a customer here.
This almost reminds me of the controversy around MoviePass a few years ago. Paying a subscription price is a good model for users, but the economics only make sense if the total number of subscribers can effectively subsidize the power users. In the case of MoviePass, there were way more power users than they had anticipated and the business model quickly collapsed. I confess, I was one of those power users. I saw way too many movies. It wasn’t fair to average subscribers.
And like MoviePass, I’m one of the V0 power users that is making the subscription model untenable. To be fair, I would happily pay a higher subscription price if I needed to, because V0 is a gamechanger for me. Ideally, Vercel would just make power users like me opt-in to a higher subscription tier, instead of completely throwing out subscriptions all together. The issue with token-based pricing is that it doesn’t sound like Vercel has added safety checks to make sure you aren’t being charged for V0 failures. That will be crucial for token-based pricing to work. Because nobody will stick around long if they are being charged for failed responses. Also, switching to token-based pricing is weird because I have absolutely no context for how many tokens my average request is using. There are no token-metrics, etc to even get a baseline for what sorts of calls are cheap vs expensive etc. The other issue is that understanding token-based pricing usually requires a fair amount of understanding about AI context. And since V0 is marketed as a tool that can be used by non-devs to build apps, man their customer service is going to have a huge problem on their hands as they try to explain to non-ai devs or non-devs what the token system actually is.
With OpenAI for example, if you are an average user on Pro you will see a little detail about how many messages you can send with each model. If I want to user 3o for example I get so many more responses till next week. That is a system anyone can understand. Imagine of OpenAI instead tried to tell people how many tokens they got for each model. It would be a nightmare because no one would understand it and they would have to work 24/7 to try to explain it to people. I’m guessing V0 will have to adopt some pricing model that is based on response not tokens if they don’t want to deal with an endless line of upset customers complaining about confusing token-based-pricing.
However, response-based pricing for a code editor opens a whole other can of worms since V0 is meant to run long-running responses so it doesn’t output incomplete code. So if V0 can’t go with response-based pricing, and it won’t want to deal with an endless line of confused and unhappy users that don’t understand tokens, what is the right move? I think they need to just raise the prices. I am currently paying 20$ a month. I’d happily pay 60-80-100 a month whatever if it keeps V0 from switching to this token-based pricing system. I’m sure there are a lot of other power users like me that get insane value from V0 that would happily pay more. So maybe a hybrid model for now? Where users can opt-into a higher paid subscription plan if they hit certain ceilings? That would keep the power users happy, and it would keep the base users from getting confused and leaving.
1 Like
I hope everyone just cancels their plans. 100X increase it not improved for anyone but vercel.
1 Like
Yep. I agree. Was only able to use it half a day this month after the change on team plan. Significantly worse pricing structure. Although I give the Vercel Marketing team a Gold star for their comedy routine with the title. “Improved Pricing” Hilarious.
Have cancelled both the plans I had and back to copilot for now. Adios
1 Like