4 ms·

This is partially why, at least for LLM-assisted coding workloads, orgs are going with the $200 / mo Claude Code plans and similar.

jsheard 1y ago
Until the rug inevitably gets pulled on those as well. It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month, and long term it's not in their interest to sell you >$200 of tokens for a flat $200.
- Hamuko 1y ago
  The pricing model works as long as people (on average) think they need >$200 worth of tokens per month but actually do something less, like $170/month. Is that happening? No idea.
  - jsheard 1y ago
    Maybe that is what Anthropic is banking on, from what I gather they obscure Max accounts actual token spend so it's hard for subscribers to tell if they're getting their moneys worth. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109
  - hombre_fatal 1y ago
    Well, the $200/mo plan model works as long as people on the $100/mo plan is insufficient for some people which works as long as the $17/mo plan is insufficient for some people. I don't see how it matters to you that you aren't saturating your $200 plan. You have it because you hit the limits of the $100/mo plan.
  - KallDrexx 1y ago
    I don't know about for people using CC on a regular basis, but according to `ccusage`, I can trivially go over $20 of API credits in a few days of hobby use. I'd presume if you are paying for a $200 plan then you know you have heavy usage and can easily exceed that.
  - jopsen 1y ago
    It's probably easier (and hence, cheaper) to finance the AI infrastructure investments if you have a lot of recurring subscriptions. There is probably a lot of value in predictability. Meaning it might be visible for a $200, to offer more tokens than $200.
- baq 1y ago
  meanwhile me hiding from accounting for spending $500 on cursor max mode in a day
  - typpilol 1y ago
    Did you actually get 500 bucks worth of work out of it?
    - GoatInGrey 1y ago
      How should they know? It's not like they're checking what it does.
    - joegibbs 1y ago
      It depends on the salary, right? If you're in Silicon Valley paying 500k TC it probably makes sense to let your employees go wild and use as much token spend as they like.
    - baq 1y ago
      No way to measure it directly, but it did write 4kLOC of mostly working angular... whether non-max would manage the same feat in the same time is an open question.
- sellyme 1y ago
  > It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month This is only true if you can find someone else selling them at cost. If a company has a product that cost them $150, but they would ordinarily sell piecemeal for a total of $250, getting a stable recurring purchase at $200 might be worthwhile to them while still being a good deal for the customer.

jsheard 1y ago

Until the rug inevitably gets pulled on those as well. It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month, and long term it's not in their interest to sell you >$200 of tokens for a flat $200.

Hamuko 1y ago
The pricing model works as long as people (on average) think they need >$200 worth of tokens per month but actually do something less, like $170/month. Is that happening? No idea.
- jsheard 1y ago
  Maybe that is what Anthropic is banking on, from what I gather they obscure Max accounts actual token spend so it's hard for subscribers to tell if they're getting their moneys worth. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109
- hombre_fatal 1y ago
  Well, the $200/mo plan model works as long as people on the $100/mo plan is insufficient for some people which works as long as the $17/mo plan is insufficient for some people. I don't see how it matters to you that you aren't saturating your $200 plan. You have it because you hit the limits of the $100/mo plan.
- KallDrexx 1y ago
  I don't know about for people using CC on a regular basis, but according to `ccusage`, I can trivially go over $20 of API credits in a few days of hobby use. I'd presume if you are paying for a $200 plan then you know you have heavy usage and can easily exceed that.
- jopsen 1y ago
  It's probably easier (and hence, cheaper) to finance the AI infrastructure investments if you have a lot of recurring subscriptions. There is probably a lot of value in predictability. Meaning it might be visible for a $200, to offer more tokens than $200.
baq 1y ago
meanwhile me hiding from accounting for spending $500 on cursor max mode in a day
- typpilol 1y ago
  Did you actually get 500 bucks worth of work out of it?
  - GoatInGrey 1y ago
    How should they know? It's not like they're checking what it does.
  - joegibbs 1y ago
    It depends on the salary, right? If you're in Silicon Valley paying 500k TC it probably makes sense to let your employees go wild and use as much token spend as they like.
  - baq 1y ago
    No way to measure it directly, but it did write 4kLOC of mostly working angular... whether non-max would manage the same feat in the same time is an open question.
sellyme 1y ago
> It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month This is only true if you can find someone else selling them at cost. If a company has a product that cost them $150, but they would ordinarily sell piecemeal for a total of $250, getting a stable recurring purchase at $200 might be worthwhile to them while still being a good deal for the customer.