Excellent details. However, I think in the software works, folks who gave only seen the SAAS-subscriptions world are confusing between past as you go model vs. Actual outcome based.
Per conversation pricing is much closer to pay as you go, vis-a-vis outcome based.
Just like how, once upon a time we used to pay per minute for a mobile call. Today we pay a fixed monthly fee. Now if the pricing switches to, you only pay when the call is initiated and successfully connected - fixed fee for any fusion of the fee. It is still a part as you go model largely based on "only if you use" but a didn't pricing.
I think the idea of outcome based / gain share approach is absolutely fantastic, it will take away a lot of unnecessary stuff. But still need more objectivity on defining those exact outcomes and tightly and rightly attributing them as you mentioned very well.
Do you think there are certain verticals that lend themselves more naturally to different models? Traditional SaaS vs. consumption vs. outcome-based pricing? The idea of outcome-based pricing is really interesting, and I can see it becoming increasingly popular as it becomes more measurable.
It seems as though these different models are sometimes viewed on a development curve, with the next being superior to the previous. I am not sure if that is the case though. Certain offerings seem to be a better match for traditional SaaS, others for consumption, and still more for outcome based. I also imagine that some functions have difficulty getting budget for anything other than a fixed cost.
🙌
Great work! Fun convo
Excellent details. However, I think in the software works, folks who gave only seen the SAAS-subscriptions world are confusing between past as you go model vs. Actual outcome based.
Per conversation pricing is much closer to pay as you go, vis-a-vis outcome based.
Just like how, once upon a time we used to pay per minute for a mobile call. Today we pay a fixed monthly fee. Now if the pricing switches to, you only pay when the call is initiated and successfully connected - fixed fee for any fusion of the fee. It is still a part as you go model largely based on "only if you use" but a didn't pricing.
I think the idea of outcome based / gain share approach is absolutely fantastic, it will take away a lot of unnecessary stuff. But still need more objectivity on defining those exact outcomes and tightly and rightly attributing them as you mentioned very well.
Interesting times, ahead.
Do you think there are certain verticals that lend themselves more naturally to different models? Traditional SaaS vs. consumption vs. outcome-based pricing? The idea of outcome-based pricing is really interesting, and I can see it becoming increasingly popular as it becomes more measurable.
It seems as though these different models are sometimes viewed on a development curve, with the next being superior to the previous. I am not sure if that is the case though. Certain offerings seem to be a better match for traditional SaaS, others for consumption, and still more for outcome based. I also imagine that some functions have difficulty getting budget for anything other than a fixed cost.