← Back to context

Comment by tsimionescu

21 hours ago

Not the OP, but it seems pretty clear to me - they're suggesting that fixed per-month pricing with unlimited usage shouldn't exist at all, as it doesn't really make sense for a product that has per token costs.

Instead, they're saying that a 200$/month subscription should pay for something like $250 worth of pay-per-token API tokens, and additionally give preferential pricing for using up more tokens than that.

So, if the normal API pricing were 10$ per million tokens, a 200$ per month subscription should offer 25M tokens for free, and allow you to use more tokens at a 9$/1M token rate. This way, if you used 50M tokens in a month, you'd pay 445$ with a subscription, versus paying 500$ with pay-as-you-go. This is still a good discount, but doesn't create perverse incentives, as the current model does.