Salesforce is tightening control of its data ecosystem and CIOs may have to pay the price

CIOs may see price increases for third-party applications that work with Salesforce data, as the effects of the company’s higher charges for accessing the data ripple through the broader software supply chain.

Software partners are now feeling the impact of changes Salesforce announced in February to how it charges for API access. Data integration vendor Fivetran is one such partner caught in the middle, weighing whether to absorb the higher the costs, pass them on to customers and risk backlash, or pursue alternative ways to access the data and risk straining its relationship with Salesforce.

Fivetran CEO George Fraser said the shift in pricing policy for API access could have tangible consequences for enterprises relying on Salesforce as a system of record for analytics and AI use cases. Tighter commercial and technical controls could limit how customers themselves choose to move and access their data, narrowing the set of tools they can use.

“For example, they might not be able to use Fivetran to replicate their data to Snowflake and instead have to use Salesforce Data Cloud. Or they might find that they are not able to interact with their data via ChatGPT, and instead have to use Agentforce,” Fraser said.

His concerns were first reported by The Information last week.

Salesforce framed the pricing change as standard industry practice rather than a fundamental shift in openness. The company argued that charging for API access reflects the real costs of operating, securing, and supporting enterprise-grade infrastructure at scale.

“When you use our API, you are using Salesforce compute,” said Tyler Carlson, senior vice president and head of product for AppExchange and ecosystem.

What actually changed?

At the center of the debate is Salesforce’s AppExchange Partner Program, which governs how third-party vendors or partners build and distribute commercial applications that access Salesforce data.

Salesforce requires partner vendors building a commercially distributed application, whether it authenticates Salesforce users, synchronizes data, or operates at scale via APIs, to enroll in the partner program.

Once enrolled, partners operate under one of two commercial models: API-based integration vendors, such as data pipeline or connector providers, join Salesforce’s Connector program and pay a base fee that scales with usage and volume, while vendors that build apps directly on Salesforce’s platform are subject to revenue sharing.

Earlier this year, Salesforce raised the base fee for the Connector program, the first price increase since the program launched in 2016, according to Carlson.

Connector fees are based on a flat charge per user or environment, scaled by usage and volume, but then Salesforce negotiates rates individually with partners based on what a Salesforce spokesperson described as a “fair value exchange”.

Beyond fees: the hidden risks for CIOs

Whether that’s fair to everyone is debatable, said Gaurav Dewan, research director at IT management consulting firm Avasant.

The lack of transparency and predictability in case-by-case negotiations can create uncertainty and risk for CIOs relying on the affected products, Dewan said.

And, said Pareekh Jain, principal analyst at Pareekh Consulting, the increase in the base fee for the Connector program would “in some cases increase cost of integrations, AI extensions, and niche apps.” ISVs, if forced to pay additional fees, would have to either absorb that cost or “raise their subscription prices for enterprise customers to maintain margins.”

That, said Dewan, means CIOs could see “double-digit percentage increases” in Salesforce-related spend if ISVs were to raise their subscription fees.

Such price rises would be particularly damaging for enterprises “locked in” because they had built their data flows around Salesforce, said Greyhound Research founder CEO Sanchit Vir Gogia.

“This is not traditional technical lock in where migration is impossible. It is behavioral lock in created by layered dependency over time. When integrations, data movement, and AI permissions all flow through a single commercial framework, alternatives become theoretically viable but practically disruptive,” Gogia said.

Enterprises working with vendors that refuse to accept Salesforce’s policies and price increases could also face operational complexity, Dewan said: “CIOs must reassess integration architectures, as applications that are not a part of the AppExchange program or don’t comply with Salesforce’s policies are likely to face compliance hurdles.”

How CIOs can mitigate risks

That said, analysts emphasize that CIOs still have room to maneuver and mitigate risks.

HFS Research CEO Phil Fersht said CIOs could use renewal windows with vendors to secure caps on fee increases and explore tiered pricing models to avoid absorbing cost driven by Salesforce.

And Dewan said that CIOs should map all third-party apps and estimate new commission and licensing costs in preparation.

If needed, it may be prudent for CIOs to retire underused integration and consolidate functionality to reduce dependency on high-fee apps, Dewan added.