AI startups should choose their pricing model based on a 2x2 matrix of autonomy (human-in-the-loop vs. fully automated) and attribution (how clearly its value can be measured). Low levels lead to seat-based pricing, while high levels of both unlock outcome-based models.
The new Medicare 'Access' code for AI in chronic care is priced too low to be profitable if humans are kept in the loop. This clever incentive design forces providers to adopt genuine AI-driven leverage rather than simply relabeling human effort, a first for healthcare technology.
Frame AI independence like self-driving car levels: 'Human-in-the-loop' (AI as advisor), 'Human-on-the-loop' (AI acts with supervision), and 'Human-out-of-the-loop' (full autonomy). This tiered model allows organizations to match the level of AI independence to the specific risk of the task.
For a true AI-native product, extremely high margins might indicate it isn't using enough AI, as inference has real costs. Founders should price for adoption, believing model costs will fall, and plan to build strong margins later through sophisticated, usage-based pricing tiers rather than optimizing prematurely.
For companies at the trillion-token scale, cost predictability is more important than the lowest per-token price. Superhuman favors providers offering fixed-capacity pricing, giving them better control over their cost structure, which is crucial for pre-IPO financial planning.
In the current market, AI companies see explosive growth through two primary vectors: attaching to the massive AI compute spend or directly replacing human labor. Companies merely using AI to improve an existing product without hitting one of these drivers risk being discounted as they lack a clear, exponential growth narrative.
As agencies adopt AI to increase efficiency, clients will rightfully question traditional pricing models based on billable hours. This creates an "arbitrage" problem, forcing agencies to redefine and justify their value based on strategic insight and outcomes, not just the labor involved.
Standard SaaS pricing fails for agentic products because high usage becomes a cost center. Avoid the trap of profiting from non-use. Instead, implement a hybrid model with a fixed base and usage-based overages, or, ideally, tie pricing directly to measurable outcomes generated by the AI.
The evolution of Tesla's Full Self-Driving offers a clear parallel for enterprise AI adoption. Initially, human oversight and frequent "disengagements" (interventions) will be necessary. As AI agents learn, the rate of disengagement will drop, signaling a shift from a co-pilot tool to a fully autonomous worker in specific professional domains.
The transition from AI as a productivity tool (co-pilot) to an autonomous agent integrated into team workflows represents a quantum leap in value creation. This shift from efficiency enhancement to completing material tasks independently is where massive revenue opportunities lie.
The push for AI-driven efficiency means many companies are past 'peak employee.' This creates a scenario analogous to a country with a declining population, where the total number of available seats is in permanent decline, making per-seat pricing a fundamentally flawed long-term business model.