RingCentral Meetings: increase the attendee limit for meetings

I've made this an "idea" topic so others who might be interested can chime in. Please click the "VOTE" button at the top of this page.

In terms of total participants (host + attendees), we currently support 4 on Standard, 50 on Premium, and 75 on Ultimate.

Do you know which plan you are on?  If on Standard, an upgrade to Premium or Ultimate would increase the total participant count accordingly.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled RingCentral Meetings: increase number of participants.

Is it possible to increase the number of participants on the meetings app if you disable video?

We rarely, if ever, use video conferencing but we do screen sharing all of the time and frequently have 100 people or more. This forces me to subscribe to a separate service (Glance) that can support basically unlimited sessions for screen sharing.

Can you add an option to disable video and get more connections for the screen sharing? I love the meetings app but it isn't that useful to us because of this limitation. 

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled RingCentral Meetings: increase number of participants.

We are a 12 person shop - marketing agency.  My business partner and I are the primary customer interface and schedule almost all client facing meetings.   She and I frequently need to share screens with more than 4 participants. But our employees never need to do that and are quite content with the 4 person limit or using their personal conference PIN for the 2 or 3 person meetings they might have.

Unfortunately, my only option with RC Meetings is to upgrade the entire office to Premium which adds another $120 a month for us.  Given that I can obtain 2 seats on GTM for $78 a month, the pricing schedule is not favorable to do my larger meetings through RC.

Please consider allowing individual seats to be upgraded to premium (or even Enterprise) - I'll gladly pay more for my partner and I to have 25 video/screen share participants - I just don't see why I need to pay THAT much more to give 10 of my backoffice employees a capability that they will never use.

My work around right now is to use my RC personal meeting code and then use Join.Me for the screen share.  Clunky and not ideal but I'll live with it because I'm not paying $1400 more a year for the service.

Thanks for considering.

Whilst our limit of 25 participants for day-to-day online meeting participants is more than adequate, when its comes to All Hands virtual meeting RC is not fit for that purpose.

Microsoft have launched Broadcast Meeting within Skype for Business as part of our Office 365 subscription, this allows up-to 1000 participants. I am considering using this for our all hands, by activating PSTN. Or, maintaining a Web-Ex or similar account for this purpose. It does seem a shame to fragment our end user experience considering our investment in RC.

Do you have any current or future offerings to satisfy this requirement, for say 100-150 participants?

I agree, this is ridiculously low. I had a meeting with 3 participants. When they joined the call from the computer then joined the Audio from their phone it uses up 2 slots making it impossible for the other 2 participants to join the meeting. This is completely unproductive and frustrating. Zooms & Skype version even allow 25 as default.  I just cannot understand why 4 was chosen and the default for standard and basically useless for a real meeting. 

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Meetings License Between 4 and 100...maybe 25?.

Account Type: US

We are a small to medium company with roughly 200 users. It would be more beneficial to have meetings that are somewhere between the 4 attendees to 100 attendees range. I think that maybe there should be a medium meeting license for 25 or 100 people. Our sales teams regularly host meetings with clients and the clients may need to bring in others in order to approve/confirm large deals. Those are meetings in which the attendance would be less than 100 but more than the 4 allotted.

Current Pricing:
Large Meeting: 100 for $14.99
Large Meeting: 200 for $20.00

Proposed Meeting size and pricing as examples
Medium Meeting: 50 for $10.00
Medium Meeting: 25 for $7.99

It would be similar pricing as Microsoft does with their E3/E5 licensing.
Companies can buy an E3 license and purchase individual licensing for add on applications like Power BI OR they can purchase a license where Power BI comes standard with the license (E5).


Benefits of such a feature: 
Management that must approve purchases have a more difficult time approving the $14.99 when the license is for 100 and they know their staff will realistically use it for hosting less than 15-20 attendees at a time. Having a feature like medium meetings would help smaller businesses too who don't want to spend that much for meeting sizes they will never use.

A work around to this would be to have a single license that a company would have to shuffle around (assign/reassign) in order to have different users host larger meetings. From administrative standpoint that sounds like an absolute nightmare. The pricing would reflect in easing this convenience as well.

All of the benefits really are mostly for RC since RC controls the pricing.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Increase Meeting Attendee Capacity on Standard Plans.

Recently 'all' plans received a bump in capacity for Meetings attendees. Standard plan users were left behind on this though. While the upper plans are going to 100 or 200 attendees, Standard is left with just four. In what world is four attendees sufficient for a business meeting? I would love to offer this for clients but need a minimum of six attendees to do so. Why do standard plan users not get any additional capacity to make the platform useful? We pay hefty amounts for using the service and receive constant promotions for how amazing Meetings is. Yet it's intentionally handicapped unless we pay for a Premium or Ultimate plan.

Why has RingCentral deemed Standard users to be unworthy of this service?
I have reached out to our account manager, support, sales, and now through the webinar. No one seems to have an answer - they pass me off to one another and refuse to discuss it.