> Now, these prices from GH can make sense if you are a team of 10-50, but I wonder what would be the point where it wouldn't take a bean-counter to say "can't we just hire someone else do that in-house, part-time? It would cost as much or less,

$250/user/year; for $50k yearly salary is 200 users.

I don't think $50k salary is a lot. On the other hand, I've heard you should roughly double salary costs to approximate cost to employer (including all overhead). So then a $50k/yr local gitlab (or somesuch) admin only becomes viable salarywise at 400 paying users. And if you have 400 users dependent on that one employee for their daily work, you need backup. At least another .5 FTE - so 600 users before the business case makes sense salarywise.

So that's not really soon - if you're reaching that size, you want professional support, not what a team of 1.5 employees can cobble together.