I would fully understand that I am required to upgrade, but why not sending me an email before shutting down my business completely? I even asked about such scenario on zoom meeting I had with their Sales and they said it will never happen - few weeks forward and here we are...anyways going back to replying to my customers emails regarding service outage.
There are so many questions this leaves unanswered:
- Was this a one-off error in Cloudflare's processes? (These things happen on a big enough scale.)
- Were you violating a specific clause of Cloudflare's T&C? How clear was the clause? What did you do to fix this?
- Was the issue that Cloudflare estimated that you're not paying enough given the bandwidth you're consuming? Did you end up signing up for the Enterprise plan?
Transparency would benefit both Cloudflare (in not making people unnecessarily apprehensive about becoming/remaining a customer) and you (in demonstrating that you're handling this issue in a professional and responsible manner).
Sales over the phone (was fastest) told me that it's good I contacted as otherwise in 24hours my account would be fully banned(whatever it means) and that they will prepare me an offer in 15 minutes, but it was taking longer (no response after an hour or so) and in the meanwhile I wrote Twitter and HN post which CTO of Cloudflare noticed and then after a while I've got another phone call from sales that I should update my ticket to ask unbanning my account as it was approved now by CTO which I did and that solved the issue at least for now - and that's it - no further info what the issue was, still waiting on Enterprise plan quote for me.
The only sales guy who called me back before the CTO got involved was Kingsley Okoroh out of their UK office. I’m in the states. He even had no idea why no one in the states would call me. Anyway, Kingsley tried hard to help, Kingsley should be their head of sales since no one else cares.
That is a very broken process! Ask the user to change the ticket, so they can do something that they already know is approved? Sales department sounds like a disaster.
That would be the right way to give back for customers using us as an amplifier and for corporations relying on us to be a shibboleth (a prefilter so providers know that this is a true issue unsolvable through existing support channels they have established for customers).
Sharing these learnings with other potential founders would also be in line with the raison d’etre of HN. It would provide other founders with lessons they can takeaway and apply to their future startups to maybe do a few of these things right the first time around.
For both sides, HN is “picking up slack” in the system and it would be right to support the community with candid postmortems.
That is rather aggressive?? Maybe thry live in another time zone and are asleep, or have other obligations like school pickup. Given them at least 24 hours to respond. sheesh...
Again, that doesn't seem to apply here, but I've stopped assuming that the existence of an HN support thread by itself shows malfeasance or incompetence on the part of the company.
Reality is that Cloudflare serves 60% of the internet and this issue popped up. They are checking it internally what happened, as I understand from jgrahamc.
At this point @jgrahamc has the worst of it - people show up here time after time hoping they can make enough of a stink to get him involved.
more importantly, its important to send a message. We depend on these services for our livelihood. if I'm paying for a service, the least I'm owed is the ability to get in touch with a person to rectify the situation as soon as possible. Companies who want other companies relaying on their service need to provide that if they want to be taken seriously.
EDIT: also, not to knock jgrahamc. appreciate that you're looking into this but one person on an email is not a scalable customer service solution for B2B. at the very minimum, there should be some sort of platform for filing the tickets, getting a timeframe on resolution as well as options to pay for faster turnaround.
The only way to actually be protected in this case is to run a multi-cloud strategy. Even then it's only going to protect you so far if you piss off the powers-that-be / community (see the hosting trouble Parler had as an example, not that I'm fond of Parler or anything).
It's an "I don't want to wake up to all our stuff running only on the backup provider because cloudflare shut us down for seemingly no reason with no warning".
It's avoiding unnecessary alerts and triage for the ops team by snipping an apparent liability from the stack. I've already done the same after seeing a few of these kinds of interactions with cloudflare in the R2 discord.
When I see a blog post detailing why this has been happening so often, and what they've done to fix it, I'll happily pull that infra code out of the mothballs.
I say this slightly nervously as a Cloudflare customer who serves some amount of binary data. One message is "it's ok if you're on a paid plan". Another is "it's not ok at any time". My suspicion is that "it's ok unless we notice you".
If you could come up with consistent understandable messaging that would help a lot. I don't mind paying (stay competitive against AWS and Hetzner and that's all I need) but the uncertainty is not good.
Why Cloudflare cancel paying Workers customers? Makes no sense to me.
On the R2 page https://www.cloudflare.com/products/r2/ we see:
> No more egress charges. You shouldn’t have to pay to access your data. Pay no egress charges for data accessed from R2. Our affordable and consistent pricing means no more surprise bills.
Whereas I think the non-HTML traffic terms still apply to R2. Or do they?
"Send me your details and I'll fix it" = incompetent or asshole
"Don't send me your details, I've fixed the problem for you and everyone else with the same issue" = green flag
> I would fully understand that I am required to upgrade, but why not sending me an email before shutting down my business completely? I even asked about such scenario on zoom meeting I had with their Sales and they said it will never happen
They've done this to me, too—I read the TOS and tech docs and plan details and ignored them, because according to their own stuff, they were wrong, and "first-tier sales guy said it" isn't a helpful recourse if you get told to leave (so, migration costs) or pay $$$$ because you're violating their documented permitted usage.
Hilariously, they also seemed really confused when I brought up a gaming use-case that they had an entire sales landing page for.
(Nb I actually like, use, and would recommend CloudFlare for some workloads and use-cases)
It is very easy (relatively) to build a SaaS platform that serves this amount of traffic and this can be done by even a one determined individual or a small startup team.
I don't think it is useful to measure the size of the company in the amount of requests they are serving. Revenue/number of employees are much better measurements saying more about the type of things that are/can be happening. They may have relatively low margins per request and need to get to 4B to get by to pay for couple salaries?
Must be alot of redundant data back and forth.
Cloudflare's sales team and Enterprise pricing model are one of the least effective sales organisations I have encountered in this space. Given the technical nature of their product, it's extremely hard to explain even basic uses of the tool and things like Workers are near impossible to discuss with them. I was really unsurprised to see that OP had a failed Enterprise negotiation with them as I have had the exact same conversation at three different companies now and can imagine perfectly what you were told.
The current offerings of Enterprise and Enterprise Lite simply do not map to the reality of how people use the tool and scale businesses on top of it. I think in part due to Cloudflare's history essentially selling bandwidth and caching, the model is fixated on high binary traffic workloads and simply cannot comprehend the SaaS service model that runs on it and tools like Workers.
This is mostly a rant and hopefully a small +1 signal that this area needs major improvement - but I would also love to hear if anyone else has had interactions with Cloudflare Enterprise and how they found that process?
(Disclaimer: I'm a massive fan of Cloudflare, a user of their products and hold their stock)
I have seen this everywhere. Any large software company seems to operate with 2 completely different heads when it comes to technical sales support.
The "best" experience I've had was with GitHub Enterprise sales, but mostly because they just gave me access to the docs/binaries without much frustration. If I had a bunch of questions about the technology vs cost vs how we actually want use their product, it would have been a substantial nightmare.
It was pretty novel and refreshing.
Perhaps it varies by region?
https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/examples/return-js...
From the terms
> 2.8 Limitation on Serving Non-HTML Content
> The Services are offered primarily as a platform to cache and serve web pages and websites. Unless explicitly included as part of a Paid Service purchased by you, you agree to use the Services solely for the purpose of (i) serving web pages as viewed through a web browser or other functionally equivalent applications, including rendering Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) *or other functional equivalents, and (ii) serving web APIs subject to the restrictions set forth in this Section 2.8*. Use of the Services for serving video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other non-HTML content is prohibited, unless purchased separately as part of a Paid Service *or expressly allowed under our Supplemental Terms for a specific Service*. If we determine you have breached this Section 2.8, we may immediately suspend or restrict your use of the Services, or limit End User access to certain of your resources through the Services.
Supplemental terms
> The Cloudflare Developer Platform consists of the following Services: (i) *Cloudflare Workers*, a Service that permits developers to deploy and run encapsulated versions of their proprietary software source code (each a “Workers Script”) on Cloudflare’s edge servers; (ii) Cloudflare Pages, a JAMstack platform for frontend developers to collaborate and deploy websites; (iii) Cloudflare Queues, a managed message queuing service; and (iv) Workers KV, Durable Objects, and R2, storage offerings *used to serve HTML and non-HTML content.*
I can't quite figure out how to parse this such that workers would be deemed unusable to just run an API.
I'd absolutely have gone ahead with using it for an API.
2.Cloudflare may, with or without notice to you and without liability of any kind, temporarily limit your storage and/or the number of requests you can make or receive using the Developer Platform for any reason (in its sole reasonable discretion), including without limitation, if processing such requests would put an undue burden on the Cloudflare network, adversely impact the Service, or otherwise threaten the integrity of Cloudflare’s networks.
To be fair I'm using lots of requests and bandwidth so could be reason, just if only I got an email about that before shutting everything down.
Also, while that's in the terms that's a generic get out clause I know they need but doesn't at all help you figure out what services are ok.
It's definitely an unfriendly combo to have (a) a really ambiguous policy like 2.8 and (b) enforcing via a no-warning cutoff -- even if the two policies have good justifications individually. But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that part (b) is part of the sales strategy. (Part (a) obviously is meant to incentivize a paid account for applications like yours.)
When ever there is non-transparent pricing, it's scary to try and use an infrastructure related service.
The sales teams can't go around saying that you are not a profitable customer, and they can't argue with the marketing team to be more honest about pricing on the pricing page.
So, end result, let's bump of these small free loaders. Large enterprise deals is what gets us the bonus anyways.
I like fly.io pricing in that sense. And I am sure there might be others offering a more transparent pricing, otherwise like me still stuck on AWS.
1) All but the top self-serve plan ($200 at the time) wasn't worth anything for a business past the "finding a market" stage. No SLA at all under that level (at least, at the time)
2) The $200 plan, though, is actually a hell of a bargain. You get a lot for it. If your load is almost all HTML/CSS/JS and some light-ish worker use. And (allegedly, see #5) your bandwidth use isn't crazy high.
3) They basically don't care about serving any need between the top self-serve plan and a ~$5,000-to-start Enterprise plan. If you don't fit in the top self-serve but are under that level...
4) Surprisingly, given their reputation at the lower levels of service, in the Enterprise tier, they weren't competitive on bandwidth. If the main thing you need to do is sling bits, you can do that quite a bit cheaper elsewhere. Overall, they seem to want customers who need lots of their services, not just any one component. If you don't need their various corporate VPN type products and a bunch of other stuff, they're a bad fit.
5) We were told by a competitor that OP's experience is common and is often perceived by customers (their perception, mind you) as a bait and switch (see also: that huge gap between self-service and enterprise, in which they offer no options). Now, the competitor has some self-interest there, but even the non-sales guys on the call instantly kinda smirked and shook their heads when I mentioned CloudFlare.
6) We were told incorrect things by CloudFlare's sales folks. If we'd followed their advice, we might be OP.
I investigated Cloudflare and the $200/mo plan seemed to good to be true so I contacted sales who verified that yes, it was too good to be true and my usage of the $200/mo plan would violate their ToS. They initially quoted $5k/mo over the phone, and then came back with a formal quote with a number much higher than that.
My take is that Cloudflare's product is so good that they can get away with any kind of sales practices they want. It's like shooting fish in a barrel: just analyze customers on the $200/mo tier and find the ones that look like they could spend way more. It's not even wrong in concept: sales upselling is SOP, and the low-cost tiers provide a lot of value to people who couldn't otherwise afford what they're offering. But the combination of the two sure leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
AWS doesn't have transparent pricing either, but in a different way. Yes, you can use more and more bandwidth and know exactly what you'll get charged, but once you get to Cloudflare Enterprise levels of bandwidth the AWS sticker prices would be astronomical and everyone negotiates non-transparent lower rates.
I get more worried when the giveaways / marketing is VC funded - they often end at some point or pressure inside to dial back etc.
“We have free egress to Oceania!” - no, you don’t. You are subsidizing that.
Given what aws charges and how they charge for almost everything- no reason to be any pressure to move me to another plan. AWS free tiers are relatively minuscule
https://framagit.org/dCF/deCloudflare/-/blob/master/readme/e...
And whatever happened to ngate?
I was able to contact via support chat to confirm it's indeed Cloudflare related issue as wasn't sure as it's not displayed in any form on Cloudflare dashboard that indeed account is restricted. That was around 8AM UTC.
Since then I also contacted with sales team (got the details already as they approached me in last few weeks as mentioned before) in order to upgrade to Enterprise plan as it seems like the only solution, but did not get the quote yet and account is still restricted.
Talk about coercion.
Considering that you weren’t, technically speaking, violating any terms of service, this response from them leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.
Good luck, and thank you for sharing this with us all.
However, good luck. And hope your enterprise contract with Cloudflare will be limited only to amount of time you need to migrate from their platform.
Creating a HN post is not a proper failover strategy.
All vendors do crap like this. They often have automated systems that sometimes make mistakes. It's your responsibility to build a system that takes these failure points as a reality and build working redundancies and failovers to keep your service online while you sort them out.
Never entirely trust what is said to you to secure/continue a sale, unless you have it written in a contract.
> … "Enterprise wise, that's up to you and you could likely get away with utilising self-serve as you go
… especially if what sales say to you is couched in vague works like “likely to get away with”.
This time last week, Cloudflare shut off our access to one of their services we were using because we went over quota. Well, we had actually negotiated overage charges and did actually have this in our contract. They turned the service off anyway instead of applying the overage charges we had agreed.
This is one of many things that Cloudflare has totally screwed up. Their services and devex look great from the outside, but when we started to use it for real, we found that it’s all beta quality at best and completely disorganised at an operational level.
I just repost the same comment I put in the above thread
> The thing that scary me most is that his business get shut down without any notice period (at least the author not mentioning any previous communications from Cloudflare team about the issue).
> This is really a shitty thing from Cloudflare, you cannot shut down an already running business without any notice/grace period.
I don’t really feel any sympathy for that poster. They knowingly broke the rules, they had to have known that CF could come and shut them down at any time, and they still went ahead and threw the pity party knowing that they are pretty much entirely in the wrong. It’s very much a “play dumb games, win dumb prizes”.
Would it be nice for CF to give a heads up? Sure. But I don’t think it’s required, and especially not in an egregious case like that one.
They "tolerated" a non-compliant use of their service for so long time (maybe because in the past their only goal was to increase adoption?!?) and suddenly they decided to change strategy?! No problem, it's their choice, but adding an x days grace period should be the standard. It's really easy to do.
> Would it be nice for CF to give a heads up?
Well yes, it will be really welcome. Mostly for all other their user(1/3 of internet or something like this) that maybe doesn't even know there are not full-compliant to TOS and risk their business to be terminated suddenly.
Sounds like an abuse of their terms of service to me.
What planet are you on?
I asked them to delete my data or provide the Yubi offer and they did neither. So they sit in an email folder known as bad companies. Because my data has value and they lied to obtain it for their own gain (aka fraud).
In Canada we have private prosecution/rules about falsely acquired data. Every bad story on HN puts me closer to opening that folder up and ensuring my data costs at least 100k.
Enough is enough.
https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/office-consumer-affairs/en/...
I would have never honestly considered serving _html_ from a Worker. I hope we can get an extremely clear statement from Cloudflare on what their policy is.
https://www.cloudflare.com/supplemental-terms/
(I'm the lead engineer on Workers. I don't know what happened to OP, though; I'm not personally looped into that conversation.)
Meanwhile, section "2.8 Limitation on Serving Non-HTML Content" of the terms says: "The Services are offered primarily as a platform to cache and serve web pages and websites. Unless explicitly included as part of a Paid Service purchased by you, you agree to use the Services solely for the purpose of (i) serving web pages as viewed through a web browser or other functionally equivalent applications, including rendering Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) or other functional equivalents, and (ii) serving web APIs subject to the restrictions set forth in this Section 2.8. Use of the Services for serving video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other non-HTML content is prohibited, unless purchased separately as part of a Paid Service or expressly allowed under our Supplemental Terms for a specific Service. If we determine you have breached this Section 2.8, we may immediately suspend or restrict your use of the Services, or limit End User access to certain of your resources through the Services."
Serving a "disproportionate percentage of [...] non-HTML content is prohibited". To my understanding, that means that web APIs are allowed, but only if they don't return a disproportionate percentage of non-HTML, since the supplemental terms don't expressly allow it (e.g. no JSON-only APIs).
Is that at all plausible?
I’m using cloudflare pages with workers doing the same as you on a much smaller scale. The workers reverse proxy a rest api under the same host so I don’t need to worry about CORS, take the country HTTP header provided by Cloudflare then route the request to backend servers in the nearest AWS region and also cache any responses with cache control headers utilising Cloudflare’s Edge caching. It works great and gives a fast user experience regardless of where you are in the world.
I was going to implement rate limiting backed by durable objects to protect my backends.
It seems exactly the usecase and ideal usage of workers! Now seeing this, it has me rethinking using/investing in cloudflare if they can decide if they like how you use workers or not and kick you off. It shouldn’t matter what output the worker generates as long as it conforms to https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/platform/limits/
Why didn't you use the load-balancer service?
"The main issue is not that [COMPANY] is working hard to protect itself and its customers, but that customers feel very powerless in these situations. When it takes a massive effort to get attention, especially if you're small and powerless, you feel that you have no control, and that your issues will go unanswered. What can the average, powerless customer who doesn't have the weight of social media, HN, @dang, or others on their side do when their hard-earned money or business is being held, locked, or otherwise prevented, and when the cause is not fraudulent, or if the customer is unaware of that activity? The problem is that accounts are just shut down, moneys are held, and there's no quick or clear communication, with customer support simply saying it's not in their control. It's this feeling of powerlessness that's the issue, regardless of whether or not [COMPANY] is in its rights or doing what it feels is in its and its customers best interests.
What can you do to help empower the powerless customers when their livelihoods are at stake? Can you provide some way to not instantly assume fraud or malicious intent on behalf of the customer and provide some quick and direct way for the customer to feel empowered?"
Having to resort to HN to get major problems resolved that are major customer service and potential legal / liability issues causes me a lot of stress when I realize that I have don't have nearly the same sort of power or influence as some of the others here do on HN. I worry that my complaints would simply go ignored.
@jgrahamc would love you to comment on what we can do to avoid people having to resort to HN for a solution to these problems, which favors the well-connected and squeaky wheels and disfavors everyone else.
Legislation and regulation.
Mill owners used to send little kids into running machines and they'd get shredded. Now we have child labor laws where under a certain age someone isn't allowed to operate most powered equipment.
Mill owners used to not pay people for their wages. Now we have laws with civil and criminal repercussions if you don't pay someone timely and in full.
The phone and electric companies have to follow a bunch of regulations around shutting off your service, because of the consequences.
Companies should not be able to say "and if we fail, lol whatevs, fuck off." If you are providing a service, and someone depends on it to run for their business, then you should be responsible if you fail to provide service. Cost of doing business.
In general you can’t trust salespeople and need to get everything in writing. Cloudflare is a prime example of why.
And I’d add in my case because we were keeping track of their promises, we caught them before the sales process completed. It cost them seven figures a year. But maybe it doesn’t matter - their sales approach still has them worth $20 billion.
If you're on Workers Unbound, you're probably paying closer to ~$800/mo for 4b requests; or if you're on Workers Bundled, then ~2000/mo. What were you quoted for the Enterprise plan? I thought those start at $1500/mo?
I wasn't able to get them to size something down under high-$4,000/m, when I looked at this a couple years ago. They acted like I was being annoying just for thinking there might exist any option between $200 and $5,000.
We ended up somewhere else that was much cheaper for the actual service we needed. Every other company in this space I talked to was happy to come up with a plan that fit our needs and didn't include stuff we didn't need, plus their (negotiated, not public) outbound transfer rates were in every case cheaper than what CloudFlare's sales team offered us. They'd even offer high-touch onboarding help in that sub-$5k/m range (I didn't ask, they just offered)
I think our spending's actually over $5k/m many months, now, but it'd be even higher at CF since the best rate on transfer they offered us wasn't great. I gather the actual customer demo they want is big, complex enterprises that need tunnels between multiple physical networks, oddball proxying set-ups, and stuff like that. That's not us, so they weren't a good fit—but what's weird is their self-serve plans look like they're trying to court use cases closer to ours, while they have no decent options for smoothly sizing up past that.
Crazy to think that Cloudflare who are super aggressive napping up upstarts looking for cheaper alternatives to the Big 3 (Azure, GCP, AWS), are this incompetent in closing out Enterprise deals. I thought they were as adept at Sales as they are at Engineering.
http://web.archive.org/web/20230112195712/https://tardis.dev...
- Audiovisual media
- Books
- Clothing
- Toys
- Entertainment eventshttps://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:lq...
In particular, if I ran this business, I would be concerned that I was infringing on this part of the trademark:
"( computer software for use in downloading audio, video, still and moving images and data in compressed and uncompressed form from a computer or communication network; )) [ computer software for use in database management; downloadable electronic publications, namely, magazines, books, newsletters, pamphlets, printed guides, catalogues, manuals and programs featuring entertainment, instruction, education, sport and news; ] "
That said, IANAL and specifically IANAIPL so as I said just a heads-up.
Pick one!
> 1 PB of data
That’s not small for me but might be small to OP relatively speaking.
It's not a company I trust to not randomly screw me over out of the blue anymore.
None of Cloudflare's marketing or technical documentation makes any explicit reference to "permitted usages" for Cloudflare services such as R2 and Workers.
This page for example means one thing without any reference to permitted usages and would mean something entirely different if the permitted usages were promoted with the same level of visibility as the benefits.
https://www.cloudflare.com/products/r2/
Nothing here tells me I cannot write my own video serving code with Workers:
https://workers.cloudflare.com/
You might even believe "whatever you need" from this paragraph from the above link:
"Static assets with dynamic power. Say goodbye to build steps which pre-generate thousands of assets in advance. Harness the unrivaled raw power of the edge to generate images, SVGs, PDFs, whatever you need, on the fly, and deliver them to users as quickly as a static asset."
This developer documentation would takes on an entirely new meaning if a link to "acceptable uses" was prominent at the top of each page (not fine print).
https://developers.cloudflare.com/r2/get-started/
https://developers.cloudflare.com/r2/data-access/workers-api...
https://developers.cloudflare.com/r2/examples/demo-worker/
Have built an entire application around assuming there were no such limitations I now need to rebuild elsewhere.
Humph.
I now no longer even understand what "no egress fees" means - in a way that's worse than the big cloud providers where at least you know they are charging you 9 cents per gigabyte.
For the CloudFlare people here, this is an upsell opportunity that's being missed. The whole point of the cheap plan is to hook people so they move up. But if you cut them off you can't move them up, duh. You need to rework the sales pipeline for this scenario, obviously.
Given all of this I think we’re going to have to push pause and see how this shakes out.
I use Workers to cache and stream audio. I was under the impression Workers were under a different TOS since the business model is totally different and paid per req.
All I know is to me Cloudflare seems to be a gatekeeper of the worst kind, the kind that blocks me from accessing the content I seek to load.
And the idea that it somehow is protecting the web seems more and more ludicrous each tale like this I read. With each page that is delayed in a loop before finally letting me read it, I become more and more convinced at the sheer uselessness of it. Why does anyone bother with it in the first place when it clearly doesn't actually work and worse can be turned against you at any time?
Or really any service that has it written that they can end your business without notice~
We upgraded to Enterprise, and had some issues because CF's documentation was not clear (literally a blog post), and their support took many days to even respond and then their response made it clear they hadn't even read the ticket.
I'd move everything into AWS in a second if moving DNS wasn't such a pain.
Also am forced to use the global api token because constantly get rate limited using permission-scoped api tokens -- this is from a simple Terraform plan (first thing in the morning) and after them increasing my rate limit to the max.
in my view, the root of the problem is that companies don't have usage limits in place.
they often have 'sort of' usage limits in place -- that is, they don't actually have metrics for their customers' usage, and that leads to these situations.
and these situations are insane resource hogs -- teams of people spending days to try to figure out whether some customer should be bumped up to the next level.
it doesn't happen, then the customer gets cut off.
pretty messed up for Cloudflare to try and destroy a company like that for no reason.
we get these wishy-washy usage/support/sales situations with a lot of ambigous back and forth, and BIGCOMPANY trying to kill _littlecompany_, etc.
set usage limits, when they're surpassed, move the customer to the higher tier, done.
plenty more you can do around the edges, like grace periods, etc. etc., but i feel like this is amateur hour and cruel indifference - in this case, from Cloudflare -- and not the first time we've seen indifference from them, and other BIGTECH companies.
- Is that a good way to get cheap "influencers"?
- Are there companies helping you measuring the potential "outreach" of your customers in case you piss them off?