He better hopes no one will start using it. The biggest cost factor is the bandwidth. 30 people can easily generate a steady 100 Mbps usage. A conference for 15 people is about $3/h on any cloud provider
I know the Jitsi project rejected using p2p webrtc for more than 2 participants a while back due to exploding upload bandwidth requirements at the clients, but I wonder if this video-game style interface would work OK with a single low bandwidth video stream of each participant (instead of switchable low/med/hi res ones), and maybe support 5 or 6 users over P2P instead of needing that server-side bandwidth?
My home internet is 200Mbps symmetric, and this is not uncommon in my area. I could upgrade to 1Gbps, for about $20/mo more. Bandwidth in the cloud is highway robbery. Bandwidth to home is flat rate.
It is until you read the terms and conditions and see that you have a 1TB data cap, or a more generic: we'll cut your access if you have "excessive" data usage.
I don't have a data cap though. In fact I specifically picked a provider without a data cap (out of the 2 available at my location). My understanding is data caps are more popular in e.g. Canada and Australia and such, and are hardly a thing anywhere else. At least not to the point where they'd be enforced.
Once everyone using your provider start filling up their connection, it won't be long until they implement one.
What you got is a 200Mbps connection to your provider (and still that's probably a lie, it's probably shared before reaching their endpoint), afterward it's fully shared with every other customer... that's just how the internet is made, you can't have a dedicated 1 gbps to every single server, that just doesn't make sense.
Thing is, the higher the requirements, the more expensive it is to support, that's simple math... If you got 10 000 clients that download 1 gbps, you need 10 tbps, it's even worse if they are all on the same service, that connection won't support this, believe me.