I have been a dedicated user of Cursor and have already renewed my subscription for two years; however, the way you are acting today will surely cause you to lose your most loyal supporters. In this era of AI coding, a multitude of new Agent are emerging and winning over users, yet you seem intent on driving away even your remaining loyal base. I am extremely disappointed in you.
As a long-time Cursor user, I find this deeply unacceptable.
I have paid for Cursor for almost two years. Beyond that, I have actively recommended Cursor to people around me and promoted it through my own content and social media channels. My referral history shows hundreds of sign-ups. In other words, I was not just a paying user — I helped bring new users to Cursor because I trusted the product.
That is exactly why this change feels like a betrayal.
Cursor is now retroactively changing the practical value of the legacy 500-request plan and calling it a “bug fix.” From a user’s perspective, this is not a technical correction. It is a downgrade of a paid plan that early supporters relied on.
If this is how Cursor treats long-time users and people who helped promote the product, it becomes very difficult for me to keep recommending Cursor to others. I cannot in good faith tell people to trust a product whose paid plan terms can be reinterpreted after the fact.
This is not only a pricing issue. It is a trust issue. Cursor should provide a fair resolution for legacy individual users instead of pushing early supporters into a more expensive and less predictable billing model.
I strongly agree with what you said. We will recommend cursor to others, as we have been using cursor for a long time and have developed some attachment to this tool. We hope it will improve further, and we have seen cursor continuously iterate and optimize. We are willing to grow alongside it, but it doesn’t seem to value its old friends:(, which really bothers me.
It does affect him, he renewed his sub expecting the same terms and conditions as before. It is not a brand new sub.
I am in the same situation. Would not have renewed/continued otherwise.
I brought over 30 people to cursor, maybe more (mostly from my company) all on the new plan. Mostly cause they trusted my judgement as an earlier power user. I kept most of them staying, despite claude code and codex making so many improvements…, being popular etc..
But this really feels like a betrayal. Changing the terms at the point of payment/renewal seems natuaral, bit mid-subscription is.. immoral at the very least.
And no matter what you guys say.. this behaviour was most certainly not a bug. A bug is treating e.g. GLM 5.2 as a max only model while your own docs say otherwise Models & Pricing | Cursor Docs
By posting here, I am confirming that I subscribed before September 15, 2025. If you can restrict legacy users from accessing the latest models today, you could easily make a single request consume 100 credits tomorrow and just brush it off as a ‘bug fix.’ You guys have absolutely no bottom line. Is your country completely lawless? How can you modify the user agreement so arbitrarily?
Extremely irresponsible
@Cursor @ElonMusk
Three years. That’s how long some of us have been here. From “unlimited” to “500 requests” to now “Max Mode.” Each time, the plan we paid for meant less. Each time, it was called a “bug fix” or a “pricing adjustment.”
Here’s what’s actually happening:
Legacy users are being told: want to use Fable 5? Turn on Max Mode. But Max Mode doesn’t just “consume” our 500 requests — it incinerates them. One serious query can burn through a huge chunk of the monthly allowance.
Meanwhile, Composer 2.5 — Cursor’s own model — works just fine without Max Mode. Funny how that works.
And the “solution”? “Just upgrade to the new plan.” Translation: lose your legacy plan forever. That’s not a choice. That’s extortion dressed as an upgrade path.
Users aren’t stupid. We see what this is: a slow, deliberate campaign to make the legacy plan so useless that we’re forced to either pay more or leave. And if we leave? Great, you save on infrastructure costs. Win-win for you, right?
But here’s the thing: we built this product. We were the early adopters who recommended Cursor to everyone. We were the ones who trusted the promises you made.
And now? You’re treating us like dead weight.
$60B acquisition. Can’t afford to honor the commitments you made to the users who got you there?
Fix it. Or at least have the spine to admit what you’re doing.
I think tagging @ElonMusk is the right thing to do. However, I believe posting it on X might make it easier to get his attention. After all, compared to Cursor, Elon Musk places much greater importance on reputation and users.
Fully agree. Is this even legal outside the US? Practices like unilaterally changing subscription terms mid-cycle could run afoul of consumer protection laws in the EU, UK, or other jurisdictions with stricter regulations around contract changes and unfair commercial practices. Regardless of the legal outcome, this kind of irresponsible behavior deserves to be called out.
With this adjustment, you are limited to using the previous-generation model; Cursor Pro is effectively relegated to handling only the most basic development tasks, and the new payment model essentially restricts you to just 2–3 uses.
For the same $20, you’d be better off subscribing to ChatGPT Plus or Claude Pro.
I completely agree. Instead of continuing with Cursor, it’s better to just subscribe to ChatGPT or Claude Pro directly.
The Cursor team lacks basic respect for its users.
我也是Cursor長久初始用戶.從0.0XX板就開始使用.
並且會向所有同事&同學&朋友推薦
讓他們從vscode & claude code轉向Cursor
今天20260707AM10~11被強制使用MAX
.更誇張是僅讀取1MB文件就消耗496/500+6美元~
“The model “claude-fable-5-thinking-high” requires Max Mode to be enabled. Please enable Max Mode and try again.”
我也想長期使用Composer 2.5但是真的與Opus4.6~Fable 5差距太大.同一個問題&同一提問.錯誤更多.還會將原本良好文件&代碼破壞.
請問大神們有其他推薦方案&套件嗎?可以使用Fable 5但是盡可能的接近500套餐
跪求cursor真的給我一條活路
I am a yearly subscriber on the legacy plan – a plan that was sold to me with a clear promise of 500 requests per month. I chose this plan precisely because its pricing and usage model were predictable and fair.
Today, however, I find that many of the newest, most useful models are locked behind Max Mode. I am forced to use Max Mode if I want to try them, which means I’m now billed on a token‑based API cost + 20% surcharge – a system that is orders of magnitude more expensive and can burn through my entire monthly allowance in a single task.
This is not a minor inconvenience. It is a fundamental change to the terms I agreed to when I paid for a full year in advance. I never signed up for a pay‑per‑token service. I signed up for a fixed‑request plan. By making new models exclusively available through Max Mode, you are effectively nullifying the value of my subscription and forcing me into a pricing model I never consented to.
Worse, this feels like a direct betrayal of your earliest supporters – the very users who believed in your product, recommended it to others, and helped you grow. Instead of grandfathering us in with fair access, you are punishing our loyalty by turning our subscription into a hollow shell and demanding more money for the same functionality we reasonably expected.
My request is simple and, I believe, perfectly reasonable:
Allow legacy plan users to use new models without being forced into Max Mode. Let us stay on our original request‑based usage for all models, even if that means we receive slower or lower‑priority access. We are not asking for free features; we are asking for the product we already paid for.
I already discussed the same there.
Sorry, I accidentally clicked the like button and couldn’t remove it. I personally do not support this decision and strongly oppose Cursor unilaterally changing the model usage billing policy for existing users.
I am considering switching to the Claude or GPT Pro plan. The usage allowance provided by the subscription is higher and more controllable compared to Cursor’s API pricing.
This isn’t the first time our rights have been eroded! I can’t even imagine what will happen next.
I don’t mean to make a fuss, as long-time users, we hope Cursor can continue to grow and remain stable for the long term.
However, we cannot accept this outcome. Please provide a constructive solution.
I think this is a good idea also. I dont like shouting on social media.. but this crosses a line.. if somebody makes a post there please share. I would do it but i am not an active user, very small following so maybe not the best
I can’t help but suspect they’re just placating us with empty words