Atlassian's CEO argues against the death of per-seat pricing. He states that customers dislike the unpredictability of consumption models, and value-based models are too hard to measure accurately. This practical friction ensures simpler, predictable pricing will persist.

Pure value-based pricing (e.g., per seat) fails for AI products due to unpredictable token costs from power users. Vercel's SVP of Product advises a hybrid model: one metric aligned with value (like seats) and another aligned with cost (like token usage) to ensure profitability.

Usage-based pricing for AI faces strong customer resistance. Unlike cloud storage where usage is directly controlled, AI credit consumption can be driven by new vendor-pushed features. This lack of control and predictability leads to bill shock, making customers prefer the stability of per-seat models.

As AI agents reduce the number of human "seats" required to use software, vendors are accelerating their move from seat-based licenses to usage-based models. The revenue lost from fewer users is expected to be offset by higher consumption, as automated workflows interact with platforms far more intensively than human employees.

The dominant per-user-per-month SaaS business model is becoming obsolete for AI-native companies. The new standard is consumption or outcome-based pricing. Customers will pay for the specific task an AI completes or the value it generates, not for a seat license, fundamentally changing how software is sold.

The move away from seat-based licenses to consumption models for AI tools creates a new operational burden. Companies must now build governance models and teams to track usage at an individual employee level—like 'Bob in accounting'—to control unpredictable costs.

Beyond upfront pricing, sophisticated enterprise customers now demand cost certainty for consumption-based AI. They require vendors to provide transparent cost structures and protections for when usage inevitably scales, asking, 'What does the world look like when the flywheel actually spins?'

In the age of AI, software is shifting from a tool that assists humans to an agent that completes tasks. The pricing model should reflect this. Instead of a subscription for access (a license), charge for the value created when the AI successfully achieves a business outcome.

AI startups often use traditional per-seat pricing to simplify purchasing for enterprise buyers. The CEO of Legora admits this is suboptimal for the vendor, as high LLM costs from power users can destroy margins. The shift to a more logical consumption-based model is currently blocked by the buyer's operational readiness, not the vendor's preference.