I so love this discussion about the ticket costs...
You have an active roster without buy in?
50k per existing member.
You have a (healthy or not, doesn't matter) unit with buy in?
All the costs or a big part have to be paid by the new member. Everyone else pays nothing or a smaller amount.
You have a lot of inactive players?
You are basically screwed. The costs go up for everyone else.
So is it unreasonable to ask for a cash donation to offset the high costs of recruiting new players?
No. But it is unreasonable to penalize a player for the INACTIVE or unsocial players in the unit. I don't know how many new members we are talking about per month... but let's just say 20 ... that means every member of the unit would have to pay 2 million C-Bills per month to the unit coffer. So instead of 16 million for one invite, it would be 2 million for 20! Take the 8 months for the 16 million and you have up to 160 possible new members and it is much easier to get together on a monthly base.
And it would even be a fairer system as what I read here. Unit founder has to pay a total of 50k C-Bill. Next one 100k and so on... sounds absolutely fair and reasonable, right? I mean you were the 21st person in the unit, so you have to pay 1 million C-Bills, while the founder paid only 50k...101st person? 5 million... compared to 50k... absolutely fair and reasonable... 321st person... 16 million... compared to the 50k...
Don't get me wrong... the whole system is a half-baked C-Bill sink in my opinion.
If they really wanted to make big units bleed... a linear progression model isn't the way to go.
If they wanted to make units with many inactive players bleed? Well done. It works, as long as the unit is not giving the costs to new players... what some of them do...
What could have worked better?
They could have chosen the unit size they want (as an example just say 12 man) and after 1/2 or 3/4 of that size start taking a fee. The fee could be quite small and then it could get higher and higher per existing member to discourage big units (if it was targeted at big units and not a "micro" C-Bill sink).
They could have given better tools to monitor the activity in the unit. Even something like "time spent doing FP drops" and "time spent doing QP drops" per month would have been ok.
Is the system fair as it counts for every unit with more than one member?
Depends strongly on the organisation of the unit.
Let's say you have a member limit of 50 people in mind, when founding the unit... then you can get the costs distributed fairly (and have some C-Bills in the coffer, after the 50th person is invited... which could be used to catch minor fluctuations).
If you have a highly fluctuating amount of players or no set maximum number of players, it becomes more work, but it can still be done in a fair way.
If you give the costs totally to new members (which is not really possible, because you still need 50k C-Bills more for the next than for the one before) it is not fair for members joining the unit later.
But back to topic:
OP: Sorry for you to pay and then get kicked out. They can use the C-Bills to rebuild the unit up to a point (but someone had to pay the fee to get you in before...). So I get why you feel like being cheated or as if they stole from you. At least they can't spend the money on mechs or things like that. So it is no scam. And it all depends on how long you were in the unit and what you got out of it. I fear not the equivalent of what you paid for entering