Our Campaign Is Growing – Help Us Make Our Voices Heard!
OUR CAMPAIGN IS GROWING – THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
November 4, 2026
Dear Supporters,
Thank you for supporting our campaign!
Our concerns about OpenAI's planned consolidation of ChatGPT and Codex usage allowances are receiving growing attention.
The main OpenAI Developer Community discussion has attracted thousands of views and more than 180 replies. Plus, Pro, and Business subscribers are sharing their experiences and concerns.
OpenAI Support has acknowledged our petition and stated that our feedback will be forwarded internally.
Independent game developer HPWsoft has also publicly supported our demands through a press release.
These are encouraging developments, but our most important arguments deserve even greater attention.
WHY CONSUMERS CHOOSE SUBSCRIPTIONS
There is an important economic principle behind our campaign that goes far beyond ChatGPT.
People often prefer predictable monthly subscriptions over usage-based billing.
And this preference is supported by established economic research.
In their 2006 study, "Paying Too Much and Being Happy about It", published in the Journal of Marketing Research, Anja Lambrecht and Bernd Skiera examined why consumers sometimes prefer flat-rate pricing even when paying per use could be cheaper.
A major factor is the value people place on protection against unpredictable bills and the freedom to use a service without constantly monitoring a running meter.
This research was not conducted specifically on AI subscriptions, but the underlying consumer preference is highly relevant.
People do not necessarily choose subscriptions because they expect unlimited resources.
They choose them because predictable costs provide security, convenience, and peace of mind.
And for professional users, that predictability is essential.
THE PROBLEM WITH USAGE-BASED UNCERTAINTY
OpenAI's planned shared allowance introduces a fundamental conflict between different professional activities.
Complex reasoning, research, software development, and multi-step AI workflows have unpredictable computational requirements.
A demanding Codex task may consume the capacity needed for subsequent ChatGPT High reasoning.
A lengthy reasoning session may reduce the resources available for implementation and testing.
Even generous shared allowances cannot eliminate this conflict.
And upgrading to Pro or Business does not fundamentally solve it.
When allowances are exhausted, users may have to wait or purchase additional credits.
The result is uncertainty about both available working capacity and potential additional costs.
This undermines one of the main reasons people choose subscription services in the first place.
A predictable monthly subscription should not become a constant exercise in monitoring consumption and worrying about the cost of completing a task.
PUBLISHING LARGER LIMITS IS NOT THE SOLUTION
Our central concern is not whether OpenAI's future shared allowance will be larger or smaller than today's separate allowances.
The problem exists regardless of the precise quota size.
Even a very large shared allowance cannot guarantee that one demanding workflow will leave sufficient resources for another.
Publishing exact token limits and consumption rates would improve transparency.
However, transparency alone does not provide planning certainty.
Customers also need protected access to the capabilities they depend on and predictable conditions for completing their work.
A higher subscription price without these protections does not resolve the underlying problem.
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR PREDICTABLE PRICING
Predictable subscriptions are not only beneficial for customers.
They can also be commercially valuable for providers.
Customers who trust the long-term reliability of a service have stronger reasons to maintain their subscriptions and build their workflows around it.
A Plus subscriber developing a small business today could become a Pro, Business, or API customer tomorrow.
Conversely, uncertainty about future costs and available capacity may discourage customers from making long-term commitments.
The public discussions now include professional users who are questioning whether they can continue relying on ChatGPT under the announced changes.
Some have stated that they may move to competing services.
At least one Pro subscriber has publicly reported cancelling their subscription.
These are individual reports rather than evidence of a broader cancellation trend, but they illustrate the potential business risks.
CONSTRUCTIVE ALTERNATIVES EXIST
Community members have suggested several practical approaches.
Our preferred solution remains preserving separate usage allowances for advanced ChatGPT conversations and Codex/Work.
If OpenAI nevertheless introduces a shared allowance, it should provide guaranteed, protected reasoning capacity that Codex cannot consume.
Customers could also be offered transparent fixed-price options with clearly defined, protected capacities and predictable maximum costs.
Additional credits should remain optional rather than becoming the only way to sustain demanding workflows.
Another community proposal suggests developing managed AI teams as a genuinely new premium capability, creating additional revenue without weakening the value of existing subscriptions.
Innovation and sustainable business models do not have to come at the expense of existing customers.
OUR MESSAGE TO OPENAI
We understand that advanced AI requires substantial computing resources.
We are not demanding unlimited access or unlimited computation at a fixed price.
We are asking OpenAI to recognize why customers choose subscriptions.
Predictable pricing and dependable working capacity are valuable product features.
A subscription should provide meaningful planning certainty, not merely access to an unpredictable consumption meter.
Our demands remain clear:
Preserve separate ChatGPT advanced-reasoning and Codex/Work allowances.
Protect the practical working capacity of existing subscribers.
Provide transparent and dependable subscription conditions.
Keep additional usage charges optional and financially controllable.
Consult paying customers before fundamentally changing subscription value.
NOW WE NEED YOUR HELP!
Our petition has received its first supporters, and the public discussion continues to grow.
But to influence a decision affecting millions of subscribers, we need to reach more people.
PLEASE SHARE THE PETITION
If you know someone who uses ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, or Codex, please share our petition with them.
Even one personal recommendation can help us reach new supporters.
https://www.change.org/KeepChatGPTAndCodexSeparate
CONTACT OPENAI
If you are a paying subscriber, consider contacting OpenAI Support.
Explain why predictable subscription costs and protected reasoning capacity matter to you.
Your own experiences are more valuable than repeating standardized complaints.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Share your perspective in the OpenAI Developer Community or relevant GitHub discussions.
In particular, explain whether you prefer predictable fixed subscriptions over unpredictable usage-based additional costs.
Help demonstrate that this is not simply a debate about wanting more AI usage.
It is about the fundamental value of subscription services.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
Every genuine signature and every constructive contribution helps bring these concerns to the attention of OpenAI.
Together, we can advocate for a fair solution that respects both the economic realities of AI providers and the legitimate expectations of paying subscribers.
Fair AI Usage Initiative
A unified interface is progress. A unified restriction is not.
Predictable pricing is not a luxury. It is part of the product.