3 ms·

All enterprises users (people using them for work and not side projects) can't get the subsidized plans. I would say subsidized plans are a minority of usage?

nickthegreek 3mo ago
The subsidized userbase is large enough that cheema is right to call this out this distinction for other readers.
rodrodrod 3mo ago
People _can_ get subsidized plans for work: we use Claude Teams, $100/mo premium seat, which caps at 150 seats. Not enterprise tier, but fine for SMBs.
- lnrd 3mo ago
  As long as you are fine with everything your team puts into Claude being retained by Anthropic. Afaik only enterprise API plans provide non data retention policies.
monk_grilla 3mo ago
I imagine that most small to medium sized businesses are on either individual plans or Teams plans. The vast majority of firms do not need more than 150 seats, and API rates are not sustainable for most.
- byzantinegene 3mo ago
  if this is true, the frontier labs are not able to justify their trillion dollar valuations, they are barely making anything on subsidized plans.
  - bensyverson 3mo ago
    Hey, are you trying to imply that the Emperor has no clothes or something? /s
  - nl 3mo ago
    You can bet that most people on those plans do not tokenmax.
    - deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
    - lelanthran 3mo ago
      I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding, and even the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop. I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly.
      - nl 3mo ago
        > I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly. The people paying for the plan are not the same people using it. Of 6 people I have data on the $200/plan only 2 regularly use more than $400 value. > I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding The person I've personally seen use the most tokens isn't a coder. They do the "second brain" thing and wow it uses a lot of tokens. They believe in the value, and TBH I've seen them do some pretty interesting and impressive things with it. > the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop I think this is also true. But loops actually hit the cache a lot and most people who are calculating the value they are getting from a subscription aren't taking this into account. SemiAnalysis published a snippet of their analysis, and they believe their tokens are an effective price of $0.99/million, rather than $20/million the naive pricing calculation would give you.
    - monk_grilla 2mo ago
      Tokenmaxxing is referring to the phenomenon of developers in big tech deliberately trying to use as many tokens as possible because it is a KPI? Then yeah, I would say you're right that plan users don't, probably for the best.

nickthegreek 3mo ago

The subsidized userbase is large enough that cheema is right to call this out this distinction for other readers.

rodrodrod 3mo ago

People _can_ get subsidized plans for work: we use Claude Teams, $100/mo premium seat, which caps at 150 seats. Not enterprise tier, but fine for SMBs.

lnrd 3mo ago
As long as you are fine with everything your team puts into Claude being retained by Anthropic. Afaik only enterprise API plans provide non data retention policies.

monk_grilla 3mo ago

I imagine that most small to medium sized businesses are on either individual plans or Teams plans. The vast majority of firms do not need more than 150 seats, and API rates are not sustainable for most.

byzantinegene 3mo ago
if this is true, the frontier labs are not able to justify their trillion dollar valuations, they are barely making anything on subsidized plans.
- bensyverson 3mo ago
  Hey, are you trying to imply that the Emperor has no clothes or something? /s
- nl 3mo ago
  You can bet that most people on those plans do not tokenmax.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - lelanthran 3mo ago
    I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding, and even the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop. I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly.
    - nl 3mo ago
      > I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly. The people paying for the plan are not the same people using it. Of 6 people I have data on the $200/plan only 2 regularly use more than $400 value. > I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding The person I've personally seen use the most tokens isn't a coder. They do the "second brain" thing and wow it uses a lot of tokens. They believe in the value, and TBH I've seen them do some pretty interesting and impressive things with it. > the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop I think this is also true. But loops actually hit the cache a lot and most people who are calculating the value they are getting from a subscription aren't taking this into account. SemiAnalysis published a snippet of their analysis, and they believe their tokens are an effective price of $0.99/million, rather than $20/million the naive pricing calculation would give you.
  - monk_grilla 2mo ago
    Tokenmaxxing is referring to the phenomenon of developers in big tech deliberately trying to use as many tokens as possible because it is a KPI? Then yeah, I would say you're right that plan users don't, probably for the best.