Considering the perspective of the poster, the misleading title, etc - are you actually sure they didn't?

From the additional info I read, it sounds more like the traffic wasn't the main issue.

Gambling is forbidden in a lot of countries or heavily regulated. Cloudflare uses a common IP pool for all customers, so a casino customer would possibly get their IPs blacklisted (by various ISPs). The Enterprise tier of Cloudflare has "Bring your own IP (ByoIP)", which they probably wanted to force onto this problematic customer to protect their business.

So it's actually a problem, not just them paying not enough (which is another reason to get rid of them as fast as possible).

That would have been a mature thing to do.

Is that the first communication though? I would really like to hear Cloudflare's side of the story.

There were 3 issues at once, so "trust & safety" is definitely part of it.

1. Too much traffic use, this is purely a billing issue and CF probably wouldn't even care (they haven't for years) despite losing money
2. Violating ToS with the domains, a minor infraction probably, but enough to cancel the contract
3. This is the big one: CF uses one pool of IPs for all customers, the IP of a gambling site (like a casino) will get banned by ISPs of various countries (Gambling being illegal, strictly regulated and so on). This is the trust & safety issue, CF is actively hurting by keeping this customer. The enterprise plan they want to push them to has ByoIP (Bring your own IP), which would probably have been one condition of keeping them on. CF could have communicated better (if we got the full story here..), but for $250 a month they'd much rather kick the customer off their service

And understandably you wouldn't switch plans if all you're talking to is sales without context.

The only way they wouldn’t have cash on hand as if they’re spending a ridiculous amount of cash on some project that I’m not aware of, and I feel like I would be aware of it.

Maybe someone dipshit in marketing heavily invested in LLMs, since that's the current hype among dipshits?

This scenario would mean major negligence on their part, as they had been with Cloudflare for years. When it was clear their services were costing more than the business plan paid for, that's when they should have been contacted with clear numbers and a sheepish admission that "unlimited" doesn't actually mean unlimited. It certainly seems shady to me that they attempted to make it about a TOS violation, that there's no public information about enterprise level and pricing, and that the second they said they were talking to a competitor they had their data purged. It sounds like a failed attempt at extortion to me.

I don't think I particularly agree with this take, but it's an interesting perspective.

If you are cloudflare and you suspect they broke ToS you quote which ToS has been broken, you specify which country blocking the customer is trying or has tried to circumvent and you force the customer to either move away or enforce geo-blocking for those countries (or have a separate account for those with your own IPs). There is no reason to cancel the whole account if the blocking is country-specific and there is no way that 10k a month is anyway a sufficient benefit for cloudflare for their IPs to be blocked in a country (affecting potentially hundreds or thousand of customers).