Howdy Pricing People 👋🏼 There's a fundamental tension in SaaS I can't stop thinking about: Every SaaS company wants an AI story right now. To have a credible AI story, people need to be using your AI features. If people are using your AI features at scale, your margins will take a hit. Nobody wants margin erosion because we're still valuing SaaS companies on metrics built for the previous generation. The short-term playbook says protect your margins. The long-term playbook says invest in AI or get left behind. They don't reconcile. I'm genuinely curious how you're all thinking about this: - What should SaaS companies be doing right now? - Seemingly everyone is turning to credits as a hedge to both tell the AI story and maintain margin control. Are there other strategies SaaS companies should consider? - Does something fundamental need to change in how we evaluate these businesses? Drop your thoughts below. I'll be digging into this in this week's newsletter, and would love to share perspectives from this group. 🫡 Rob

Does anyone have any benchmarks on what hospitals are willing-to-pay for SaaS Medtech / HealthTech products? This SaaS product provides analytical and predictive support across five hospital domains - Patients, ER, Beds/Wards, Surgery/Theatre and Outpatients. I'm particularly interested in "cost-per-head-of-population" or "cost-per-hospital-bed" metrics, which would provide alignment with activity-based funding models in public hospitals. There may be others...? Also interested in metrics for private hospitals (if / where different). DM's welcome if you prefer. Thanks in advance.

Back with another question for the pricing experts! Chatting with a pricing leader who's looking to create a clear framework for when something should be a standalone product vs. an Add-On for an existing product. Curious how others have thought about this? Would love to see any frameworks or hear any anecdotes from past experiences.

Calling all pricing experts! Looking for help with user minimums. Here's the situation... Yesterday, I was talking to a pricing operator, and they have: 1. A Starter tier for individuals that costs about $75/user/mo 2. A Growth tier for teams that costs $95/user/mo with a 3-user minimum The primary differentiator between Starter and Growth is integrations and API calls which means prospects with more usage end up needing the Growth plan. Other than that there isn't much feature differentiation at all. The challenge is many prospects need Growth-level usage, but do not need 3 users. So the company ends up writing custom agreements for the Growth plan with 1-user, and generally does not see any PLG upgrades from Starter to Growth. Curious if anyone has any immediate thoughts based on past experience with user minimums. Is there a way they could use minimums better? Is there a better alternative to user minimums? Would love to hear your any perspective or experience others have had!

Hi all. I’m keen to talk to / learn from anyone who has had success, or maybe no success, removing license concurrency (or reducing concurrency contravention). DM’s welcome. Thank you