@Sara Grilli - The message you are describing sounds like it could be an acquisition/marketing type message, in which case you may not need to do anything. I say this from experience as I, too, have the Business Plan and have been using the Guests feature for years and do not recall any such message. This would also explain why you are not seeing any note of this in the help center article.

It sounds like Miro is just suggesting that, "Hey, you're adding this person to a lot of boards as a Guest. Are you sure you just don't want to pay for a full license for this person?"

For a definitive answer to the intent of (and required actions on) the message you are receiving, I would suggest that you share the exact message via screenshot to the support team by following these instructions:

https://help.miro.com/hc/en-us/articles/360020185799-How-to-contact-Miro-Support#h_01F010RXA0E1S9C0WFQYX75R6C

If you're still receiving the message and can share a screenshot here (while obscuring any PII/confidential/etc. info), perhaps a Mironeer will see it and able to clarify.

And if you don't receive the message again, then it very likely was a one-time "suggestion".

Hi Robert,

thanks for the replay. here the screenshot. Hope this helps.

best regards

Sara

@Sara Grilli - Thanks for sharing the screenshot.

I am as confused as you are, as this message is not clear at all.

Have you already reached out to the support team? If not, I will gladly convert your post into a support ticket. 

Hi Robert,

please yes open the ticket.

We have a lot of guests that work on different boards and I need to clarify this point ASAP.

thanks in advance

Sara

@Sara Grilli - Ticket submitted!

By the way, now that I am on my laptop, I did a test by adding a non-team member, registered Miro user as a Guest on three boards (no info message displayed).

Then, when I tried to add the same user to fourth board, I received the same message.

I proceeded to add the user to a fifth (and six, and seventh) and the message never appeared again, and an additional licence was not consumed.

Taking a look at the message text again:

This user is already a guest on 3 boards

Inviting this user to the board results in a prorated charge of $16 per month. After this, the user can be invited to unlimited boards as a guest.

This message is confusing and should probably just be removed. I will pass this feedback along to the support team.

thanks a lot Robert!

you are great!

best regards

Sara

By the way, I was travelling and finally opened a support ticket to get clarification on this message.

I’m also running into this issue! Please update if you hear back about the ticket.

My current workaround is setting the boards I need guests on to “anyone with the link can edit” and setting a password -- that seems to be working for now. Hope that helps someone else!

Hi all! Following up -- I heard back from Miro support, this was their response:

Hey Emily,
 
Thank you for reaching out to our Miro Support Team.
 
I understand you are asking about the limitation of adding a Guest to more than 3 boards.
 
This is Vache from Billing Support, and I will be happy to help you out and share your feedback.
 
I would like to clarify that this is currently a running experiment for testing limitations on inviting a specific guest to more than 3 boards. We're using this opportunity to better understand customer preferences and ensure our services align with your needs.
 
However, the charge mentioned for inviting a Guest beyond the 3-board limit is not an actual charge, and no charge attempts will be made to your card at the moment, you can feel free to add Guests to as many boards as you wish with no limitations, and simply disregarding the charge notification.
 
Thank you for sharing your feedback with us! It’s incredibly valuable in helping us shape Miro into a tool that truly meets our customers' needs. I’ll make sure to pass your thoughts along to the team working on this.
 
If there's anything else I can assist you with, please let me know.
 
Have a great week ahead!

Vache
Miro

Hi everyone,

I’m Masha, a Product Manager at Miro, jumping in to address some of the feedback and concerns regarding the guest limit messaging you've seen recently. I want to clarify a few points and address any confusion.

The messaging you’re seeing is part of an experiment we’re running, designed to help us better understand how changes to packaging might be received by customers like you. This type of experiment, sometimes called a “painted door,” lets us gauge reactions without actually implementing any charges or changes to your current usage. No additional charges have been or will be applied as part of this test.

We understand that this approach can feel tricky, and we truly appreciate your openness and feedback as it helps us learn and improve. We plan to run this experiment for three more weeks, during which your input will be invaluable to shaping any future steps we may consider.

Thank you for your patience and for helping us shape the future of Miro.

Appreciate this is an experiment and you are seeking to gauge our reaction. Here’s mine as content creator of the year “This is the worst kind of betrayal. After busting our chops to give away up for free and support this community, you are now considering moving to paying for guests on 3 boards. As a consultant who was fleeced to move to business plan, then received ironically today an emails saying discount going and good news you get benefit “ of unlimited guest access.” If you proceed with this option I would be forced to move away from miro as it would not work for my business.” Extremely frustrated by the recent product development direction of Miro. It just feels like a money grab at every turn. Yet you expect us to continue to want us to promote, give away up for free?  Please do not do this. 

Dear Masha,

Thank you for providing clarity regarding the recent guest limit messages as part of an experiment. As an Agile practitioner working in a major retail holding and also as a consultant with many years of experience in technology, I wanted to share some constructive feedback on behalf of myself and other users who feel similarly. My goal in providing this perspective is to support Miro’s growth while also representing the voices of consultants and users who disagree with this approach.

1. Talking about transparency in Policy Changes: Experiments are valuable, but a simulated charge can be misinterpreted by users, especially without clear communication beforehand. The sudden appearance of this message raised questions and may have left some users concerned about the platform's future. Maintaining open communication on potential changes is essential to preserving trust.

2. With regrad to flexibility for Consultants: Collaboration with clients and temporary team members is an essential part of many consulting projects, and limiting or charging for guest access makes Miro harder to use in this context. The ability to invite unlimited guests was one of the main reasons many consultants, including myself, chose Miro. Imposing limits on this feature would severely restrict the platform’s applicability in consulting.

3. In relation to positioning of Miro in the Market: With alternative options available, sudden and unplanned changes in charging practices may end up driving away consultants and businesses in search of tools that offer predictability and freedom to invite external collaborators. As users of Miro, we prefer a model that doesn’t limit the number of guests but values and respects the needs of professionals who work directly with clients.

4. Regarding reputation and Feedback: Miro is highly valued by its community of consultants and corporate clients, who often provide constructive feedback. Changes that generate dissatisfaction and confusion, even if temporary, can demotivate a significant part of these users from staying engaged with the platform.

Thank you and I hope you will reflect on these points. I hope this experiment serves as an opportunity to reinforce Miro's value as an open and accessible collaboration platform for all the professionals who depend on it for their projects.

Sincerely,
Henrique Pulga

Hi @Masha Grin ,

Thanks (to you and the support team via @Emily Myers) for clarifying what is going on here.

In the work I do, experiments are not a part of our process. However, our worlds are very different – primarily in terms of Miro's target audience and the scale at which you research, design, and deliver – it's staggering!

When I am subjected to experiments (more often that I realize?), all I can control and express are my emotions and how it made me feel, which is: Not great.

So, as a matter of practice, I ask myself: Why is that? As a highly analytical type – required and valued in my profession (INTJ personality for those who can relate), I want to know and understand what is going on. And when it comes to Miro, I have quite a bit of knowledge kicking around in my head. So, these scenarios cause me to question what I know, and waste my time – again, not a great feeling.

Back to this experiment.

When I read "changes to packaging", I take this as a way to ultimately charge for something that is currently considered "free". I understand that businesses need to explore different revenue models, and I appreciate that Miro is trying to find ways to sustain its growth.

Where I believe this experiment missed the mark was that it did not consider the context of the situation:

1. Financials – A user is trying to complete a known task, but is then met with a message about unexpected charges. At this point, may people may be blocked from moving forward, e.g., confusion, not authorized to approve charges.
2. Security – It is a fair assumption for a user to see a full license fee and expect the person they were trying to add to a board would become a full team member, because that is now Miro currently works – and good for anyone who stopped to question this message. And while using the Visitors feature may have been an obvious alternative, there are several reasons why they may have been using the Guests feature in the first place. This could be due to various reasons, such as internal policies regarding Guest and Visitor roles, the need for specific permissions, e.g., just allowing editing for all is not an option, the user experience of the Guest seeing the team space in their dashboard – especially now that non-team members can no longer see Starred boards outside of their org. I'm sure there are other reasons.

For both of these reasons, and because the word has been spreading that there is, in fact, no charge and the message is completely erroneous, I hope the two key takeaways from this experiment are:

1. If the intent of the experiment was to gauge if people would be okay with paying for the Guests feature (because they continued to add the Guest, despite seeing the fake message), then the data is now no good.
2. To instate a hard-no rule to any experimental messages that will inform a customer of charges that are not real.

Given the negative impact this experiment appears to be having on paying customers, I'm not sure why anyone would want to see it continue. But, again, without knowing exactly what you're trying to learn, this sentiment is coming solely from a place of empathy for my fellow users.