Partykit is a nice open source tool that is trying to make this stuff easier around creating multiplayer applications https://github.com/partykit/partykit - built by ex core react team / cloudflare engineer
Both transactional and usage-based subscription are usage based models because the metric you are billed on is tied to usage. In one, there's no minimum cost (think twilio) and in another there's tiers of usage (hence subscription) - like Zapier where you can only buy Zaps in specified blocks. So if you want to use 433 zaps, you will still be billed for 500. So it's kinda like a subscription.
Ok, slack & notion are bad examples because often the entire team is on it by default.
But imagine tools, where there is high aversion to adding more seats unless you're 100% sure. Like CRM & CMS systems, or like Support tools (Zendesk), or shared inbox tools (like Front) or project management tools (Asana) and so many others.
That's interesting. Because that's exactly the behavior we're trying to prevent.
Think of the alternative:
- A user uses the product for one hour and they pay the same amount as they would if you use it for the entire month.
I think that's where the cap becomes important. Think of the cap as a traditional user based pricing. Now only in the case where EVERY single user ends up using it VERY actively will they ever pay that amount.
In every other case, they end up paying less, because they're only paying for the value.
So if Slack is today charging $8/user, but instead they change their model to max $8/user, but users who message lesser pay lesser than $8, then it's a fantastic decision commercially. Esp as an org scales.
I think the real issue is that, when you add a new user, you're not really sure if they're going to use the software fully, so you're hesitant adding them (think about buying a salesforce license for a solution engineer). But if someone said "hey, you don't pay the full amount, till they end up using very actively", then you're more likely to invite more people because the risk of racking up costs is lower.
So the hope is also that a pricing like this leads to more experimentation and wider adoption by a customer.
Absolutely agree with you. I do think it also depends on the kinds of companies you are seeing. In our case, we realized we have 1 member devs, but also 1000 member teams. And didn't want to drive all the larger teams towards a "contact us" button unless they were really large. So a standard user based pricing (which most of the players in our space have) didn't work for us. That's what led to the cap.
I agree communicating this is a challenge. We're spending multiple iterations on trying to have a good calculator (we're on your 10th iteration now ha!) on our pricing page to try to explain this. Coz once obviously it makes more sense from a budget perspective, but it's not necessarily intuitive. So end up getting questions around how we calculate usage etc etc. So trying to also beef up the FAQ section more.
I didn't quite understand this. Why would the vendor have a problem with this - you mean rising cloud costs?
For the customer the value is ofcourse apparent. They aren't locked into a monthly fixed price. Plus the cap helps drive predictability incase of spikes of usage.
Hey, congrats on the growth guys! Drop me an email, happy to share some advice around this. I've run small acquisitions for companies and have some specific ideas that can help you guys (ofcourse, its all free advice).
The best case scenario is where you have inbound offers.
But typically all these ideas will revolve around a couple of things:
- Figuring out the right mix of companies of companies that will value this
- Figuring out the right people to connect with (it's not always corp-dev) and tactical advice around how to reach them
- Other creative stuff (like using influencers to your advantage)
rishabhkaul at gmail dot com I am based in London, so similar timezone to you.
- I've seen team based sports be interesting for this. Like here in London, I meet a lot of folks at the cricket club. Atleast 80% of the people turn up 2-3 times a month. And then from where people end up catching up at pubs etc.
- Board games clubs
- I am not sure but maybe certain cohort based courses that involve group accountability? I'd assume if you're in a localized group like OnDeck, YC, or even a humour writing workshop down the road, chances are churn might be low (coz there's an actual cost or opportunity cost) and people are likely to connect to get feedback/accountability etc. This might be a good start to building a relationship - once the course is over, maaaybe you might stay in touch?
The other activity is to involve existing friends (incase they're nearby but don't meet often) to try to do things you like. I've seen a friend do this with Pottery classes on weekends and has been doing this for a while now, but ofcourse could be applied to anything.
Oh yes, I've seen those labyrinths! There's one right next to the elevator at Holloway road station, and I just end up ogling at while waiting for the lift to arrive. It's great!
For forgot to mention, Google and Github SSO are part of the Appsmith community edition.
The other thing to also note is that we don't put a limit on the number of users that can be added to the paid plan. This doesn't apply to Tooljet coz it only has custom pricing, but with the other players you will notice that typically you get upgraded to either a higher tier plan or a higher minimum $ commitment, as you add more users, even if you don't want the features of those higher tiers.
Hey! Rishabh from Appsmith here. Thanks for mentioning Appsmith!
Just to clarify, at Appsmith, we offer SSO (OIDC, SAML) in our paid plan (appsmith.com/pricing) - where you pay a maximum of $20/user/month (with many customers paying lesser than that as they add more users). Infact it's the only plan we have. Do check it out.