Ask HN: SaaS Subscription or Usage-Based Pricing?
I'm in the process of building a SaaS product that enables marketers to combine data analytics with generative AI. I'm currently debating whether to implement a subscription model or a usage-based pricing model for this tool.
Does anyone have experience with how conversion rates are affected by these different pricing schemes? What are the pros and cons you've encountered with each approach?
53 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 110 ms ] threadImo subscriptions are an easier sell, since it’s more predictable.
Usage-based comes with more work in the short-term: more internal metering, controls for bill-shock, observability so users can see usage by billing vector, pricing/marketing work to help users understand their expected costs for different workloads.
Do you already have customer prospects you could ask? Are they more concerned with a runaway bill or paying for subscription services they end up not utilizing?
Could you find a sweetspot in the middle? (“You only pay $3.14 for the days when an employee use the service” or “You pay for the usage, but it’s very transparent and predictable pricing, we’re not AWS”)
FWIW, I think that the conversion would be fine either way. If you haven’t already, it might be worth adding a free tier.
The data from the free tier then could answer the questions around what is a more effective model for your app. You’ll want to see healthy margins and you’ll want to mitigate for abuse that you actually see in the data from the free tier.
Baking in flexibility on delivering features packaged and priced differently becomes an unfair advantage.
Aligning pricing plans with feature flags can also help.
This might sound like additional work to the startup.
I would ask if you see your SaaS as a billing platform around features, or features that can't bill.
Billing will always evolve around clients in different industries, verticals, etc.
I have a targeted approach I have used many times before, happy to chat offline.
1. It aligns to my costs, so I'm not too worried about abuse.
2. It allows servicing "small" users, there is no need to jump onto a recurring plan. You can just buy one package of "credits" and use it for years (or even just coast quite a while on the free trial).
However I think there are downsides with the usage based pricing as well:
1. It discourages using the service. If each use costs money it is a small hurdle to clear. Even if it is cheaper most users will "feel better" with unlimited or pre-paid packages as they are using what they paid for.
2. Predictable cost to the user.
3. Can often be more profitable, especially for small users.
However, I personally prefer approaches, where not every request gets charged but instead having "packages" with a discount on every step, e.g.:
This way I also have a max. amount that won't ruin me, even if something goes wrong.So in the beginning it doesn't matter. Maybe later it will, The only way to know is to pick one and see what happens.
Success and failure will be determined by the quality of your customers and the scale of your knucklehead mistakes. Your sales contract is rounding error. At Good luck.
-at the early stages, usage models didn’t work for us because it attracted customers who were uncommitted to using the product
-the advantage of a subscription is that it filters out people who just want to use something occasionally (which is fine once you’re huge, but at the beginning you want people who are committed)
-I found it impossible to make enough money on the usage model. It’s maybe great for users but if you go out of business your users won’t be able to use it anyway
-we do automated real estate reports. When we charged per report people ran a lot less reports and tended to be stingy about running them. We wanted to encourage users to use it so an unlimited subscription made users happier, even if it meant their per report cost was higher. Also, we got tired of people computing the cost of a report mentally. Since the margins per report are good, an unlimited subscription works much better.
-once you reach a certain size having free and lower usage tiers can be a good thing but first you need a bedrock of recurring revenue that you can count on. Unless you have boatloads of VC money to burn.
-this will vary greatly depending on the specifics of your product. For example, developer tools that are easy to test out, but require a credit card to go to production make a lot of sense, but that was not us.
-if you can sign up very large customers that you know will use it a lot, usage models can make sense. But this requires a really really good product that already has PMF and requires that you can sell to mid market or enterprise customers and the sales cycles can be long. You can easily go out of business waiting to sign those customers.
One way around this is to require a subscription but the user gets the amount paid for the subscription as "free" usage and then they pay the normal rate for usage above that amount.
SaaS = more secure reoccurring revenue. Slow revenue growth. But highly predictable.
Subscription pricing works best for end-user tools that help a certain function do their job better (ongoing). Why? If your target customer has to ask their boss for more budget every time they want to use your product — your business is dead in the water.
In many industries, the customer will feel punished for using the product - the opposite of what I'd want, as someone proud of the value their product provides.
Therefore disagree, depending on the existing mentality in the niche.
Also, depending on the product or service, having a separate subscription or pay scale for individuals and businesses helps prevent sticker-shock for individuals and dismissal by corporations put-off by prices when they are too low.
On HN you're mostly talking to a niche of people who are both a) consumers and b) spend all day in code, not end-user tools.
Consumers, as a rule of thumb, mostly consume, and irrationally value their time at $0. They don't build things like companies do, so don't perceive any monetary value in doing something more efficiently via software like a company would. They'll waste hours of their life to save $5, because what would they be doing otherwise? Scrolling Instagram or watching YouTube, so who cares.
Coders, as a rule of thumb, mostly code, and irrationally value the code of other people at $0. In the back of their mind they always believe they can "code up a better replacement in a weekend." Even though this is 99.99% of the time not true.
So the intersection of these two groups could be the worst software market on earth.
I recommend going through the BMG book process to be sure all of the big areas are considered. [0]
> Coders, as a rule of thumb, mostly code, and irrationally value the code of other people at $0. In the back of their mind they always believe they can "code up a better replacement in a weekend." Even though this is 99.99% of the time not true.
This comes across as reductive stereotyping lacking in nuance and denying individual abilities of real humans who may also happen to have other hustle skills like sales, advertising, and marketing. Please don't do this.
0. https://www.strategyzer.com/library/business-model-generatio...
It can create unfortunate incentives though. For example, logging and metrics services that use usage pricing create an incentive to send less logs and metrics, which leads to reduced observability. OTOH, those are services where the cost for the provider scales somewhat linearly with the usage of the customer.
You can have the best of both worlds with tiered pricing. $20/month for x usage, plus $y for overages.
A general piece of advice: identify the closest measurable factor(s) to "the more I do $X, the more business value I get out of the service."
For example, if analyzing more data improves business outcomes, consider usage-based pricing (e.g., GBs of data). If the value comes from sharing with other departments or collaborating, then these features could be part of a pro plan, or you might use per-user pricing.
Another important point is that it's usually better to have a customer pay nothing (e.g., a free tier or a 50/50 chance of converting them to a serious plan) than to have a customer who pays inconsistently, such as $0.75 one month, nothing the next month, and $1.10 the following month. These customers are problematic; they'll demand support and play the "I'm paying" card, and you'll incur card processing fees. Avoid this by setting a minimum charge or offering a small free tier to attract users who might pay later.
This is what I often end up at honestly, but it may not suit you;
Lets say each $thing is 1 cent.
Free trial Requires card, 14 days with 1000 credits (encourage urgency to evaluate now, not later - many eventually forget), customer pays with card for anything over the 1000 in those first 14 days - but is not auto charged for a standard plan on trial end. They are then emailed to encourage conversion or the account will be deleted 30 days from trial end (encourage urgency, keep a clean platform/GDPR compliance).
Standard $20/User/Month - each user gets 2000 non rolling over credits per month, but that is aggregated at the org level e.g an org with 5 users gets 10,000 credits. Additional credits are 1c.
Pro Additional features. Depending on how much value those create you either tack on a $featuretax e.g add $10 a user, or if they are just low value nice to haves/quality of life when dealing with large volume, then trade them for a higher minimum volume so $50/user/month gets you 5000 credits per user.
Anyone who does serious volume come talk direct, but they get a discount in exchange for contractually committed usage.
-Always possible to alert on overages at an account level (100% alert to main contact should be default), cap is usually appropriate too.
This model gets you a load of stuff for free, mid volume users can add extra users for free, or choose extra nice to have features instead or aswell. A minimum charge is instituted per user, regardless of thier usage. User is not feeling like each click costs money "It's included", at least until they're using your platform in volume at which point "they're in". Door is open to doing enterprise/high volume deals.
If you use their smart cards to pay for your tickets then they cap your daily spending at $10 (the price of a day pass) and your monthly spending at $50 (the price of a monthly pass). In effect they notice if you would have been better off if you'd have bought a day pass at the start of that day or a monthly pass at the start of the month and retroactively convert you to that.
Subscription with a free tier, and usage based pricing above a certain amount.