Microsoft Teams: pricing, pros and cons
Teams is chat, meetings and files bundled into Microsoft 365, which usually makes its marginal cost zero. That bundling is both the strongest argument for it and the reason it feels like three products stapled together.
- Price
- $4/seat/moestimate
- At 50 people
- $2,400/yr
- Free tier
- Yes
- Website
- microsoft.com
Specification
What Microsoft Teams supports
The dimensions every chat tool in our catalogue is compared on.
- Conversation model
- Channels with threads
- External guests
- Yes
- Voice and video
- Full meetings
- Retention and export controls
- Yes
- Integrations
- 1,900 apps
- SAML single sign-on
- Yes
- SOC 2
- Yes
- EU data residency
- Yes
- Self-hostable
- No
- Open source
- No
- Public API
- Yes
- Native mobile apps
- Yes
The honest assessment
Microsoft Teams: pros and cons
The client is heavy, and channel/thread structure frustrates teams used to Slack.
What it does well
- Already paid for if you licence Microsoft 365 — often the cheapest viable option
- Meetings, chat and files in one product, with real PSTN dial-in
- Compliance, retention and eDiscovery that satisfy regulated buyers
What it costs you
- Threading is awkward enough that conversations fragment across chats and channels
- Desktop client performance is a recurring complaint on older hardware
- External collaboration works but is noticeably clumsier than Slack Connect
Fit
Who Microsoft Teams suits
Choose it if
- Any company already paying for Microsoft 365, where Teams is effectively free
- Regulated organisations that need retention, eDiscovery and PSTN dial-in in one licence
Look elsewhere if
- Teams that live in threads — conversation fragments across chats and channels
- Companies on older hardware, where the desktop client is a daily complaint
Head to head
Microsoft Teams compared
Direct comparisons against every other chat tool we cover.
4 alternatives
Other chat tools worth a look
Everything else we cover in team communication, cheapest first.
Questions
Microsoft Teams, answered
What is Microsoft Teams best for?
Any company already paying for Microsoft 365, where Teams is effectively free. Regulated organisations that need retention, eDiscovery and PSTN dial-in in one licence. In short: chat and meetings bundled into Microsoft 365, so the marginal cost is often zero.
What are the downsides of Microsoft Teams?
Threading is awkward enough that conversations fragment across chats and channels. Desktop client performance is a recurring complaint on older hardware. External collaboration works but is noticeably clumsier than Slack Connect. The trade-off in one line: The client is heavy, and channel/thread structure frustrates teams used to Slack.
How much does Microsoft Teams cost?
About $4/seat/mo on its common paid tier — roughly $2,400 a year for 50 people. There is a free tier. That figure is our unverified estimate; confirm it with the vendor before budgeting.
What are the best Microsoft Teams alternatives?
In team communication the credible alternatives are Discord, Mattermost, Slack, Zulip. Which fits depends on your team size, budget and non-negotiables — our questionnaire ranks all of them against your answers in about three minutes.
Is Microsoft Teams worth switching away from?
Only if one of its real drawbacks is costing you something concrete. The client is heavy, and channel/thread structure frustrates teams used to Slack. If none of the downsides above describe your situation, staying is almost always cheaper than moving — a migration costs weeks, and a tool that merely annoys you is not worth them.
Prices are unverified estimates — useful for comparing orders of magnitude, not for budgeting. Confirm the current figure with the vendor before you commit to anything.
Is Microsoft Teams still the right call for your team?
Answer about a dozen questions and we will rank Microsoft Teams against every alternative in team communication — with the reasoning shown, and the cost of switching at your actual seat count.