this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
504 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

85539 readers
3667 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SacralPlexus@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Ok but it would take 70 users paying $200 to cover the cost of $14,000. So if one person maxes out their usage, there needs to be 69 users who do not use their account at all but are still paying. And that’s just the break even point, still no profit for the AI company.

I’m struggling to believe that many people would pay that much and then underuse the subscription. It seems far more likely to me that this pricing model isn’t sustainable.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

For a consumer service, absolutely. That's too much money for a household to ignore and they are actually paying attention.

For a business user? Quite possible. My company bought subscription to one of the providers for every single employee, no matter the role. A large number don't use it at all (if they do anything, it's using a chat that's either free or included with something else), and most of the rest use it lightly. We have only a handful of folks trying to use it as much as possible. Companies frequently just buy for everyone instead of micromanaging who needs or doesn't need a service.

[–] SacralPlexus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I thought that Anthropic et al. were charging enterprise accounts based on token usage rather than just a flat subscription fee. That’s why you see things like this.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

For example, Microsoft copilot has a monthly price with a token quota and a company can choose to just make it stop working when the quota is hit.

I think I recall other plans having at least the option of token quotas, because most companies don't want to give employees a blank check for anything. I also believe that generally the token bill is on top of a fixed monthly cost too.

load more comments (1 replies)