my organization currently contains 15 github users. 2 of which are used by error reporting tools to open bugs (Sentry, Crashlytics), one of which is used by Jenkins, 3 of which are outside contractor for which github now will get the money multiple times as companies move to the same billing method.

We had 9 repos on github (and about 20 smaller ones with less collaboration on a self-hoste gitolite installation), so we paid $300 per year.

Now I have unlimited repos of which I still only use 9, but now I pay $1300 per year, whereby 3 of these accounts I'm paying for aren't actually real people and another 3 of these accounts I'm paying for even though multiple other companies are also paying for them.

Aside of the nearly 5x increase in price, I think it's also unfair having to pay for practically unused bug-reporting-only accounts and having to pay for accounts that are already paid for by a multitude of other companies.

I don't think this is good pricing for me.

Also as this isn't just a moderate increase, but a whopping 5x increase, I also strongly consider moving back away to a self-hosted solution because increasing the price by 5x is breaking the trust put into github as a third-party provider.

Increasing the price a bit is fine. But 5x is excessive.

Maintaining a gitlab instance is kind of ridiculous vs $300/yr.

On the other hand, its not exactly rocket surgery and $1300/yr would probably cover it.

So its not a theoretical issue in an isolated abstract sense but market position issue. The competition isn't the employee lunch fund but is actual competitors.

Aside from maintaining your own instance, I have no experience or contact with them but githost.io offers quite a bit for less than $100/month.