Pylon's pricing model has changed 10 times. Here's how.

View profile for Marty Kausas

CEO @ Pylon | B2B Support Platform

Pylon's pricing model has changed 10 times. Here's how 👇 1/ Seats (1 tier) 2/ Flat Rate 3/ Platform Fee + Add-Ons 4/ Platform Fee + Add-Ons + Scaling Pricing 5/ Seats (1 tier) (was meant to be temporary) 6/ Seats (2 tiers) 7/ Seats (3 tiers) 8/ Seats (3 tiers) + AI Assistants 9/ Seats (3 tiers) + AI Assistants + AI Agents 10/ Seats (3 tiers) + AI Assistants + AI Agents + Account Management The thrash is from product and vision evolution, and market expectations. To start we just wanted to charge more than $0 to prove value. After that we raised prices by saying random flat-rate numbers and seeing where we got pushback. As our product expanded, we figured we may as well charge more for the additional products that felt distinguished as we released them. Then we thought people who use certain parts of the product more should be paying more, so we introduced scaling-pricing. Then, our product and vision developed where we began replacing support products like Zendesk and our prospects were getting confused on how to compare pricing, so we decided to mirror the existing pricing model in the market to simplify. Then we started introducing new SKUs that scaled pricing (AI Assistants and AI Agents). Then we launched Account Management whose pricing also grows with usage because of AI functionality (and whose pricing for now mimics that of a customer success platform). And we're not done. Pricing will continue to evolve. Pricing is messy, there's no way around it. We've simply continued to try stuff and iterate quickly. -- Notes -- 1/ Our pricing has become more complex as we've become multi-product which has been confusing to customers. But it makes sense when you look at the SKUs as replacing existing products: - Pylon Seats → Zendesk Seats - AI Agents/Assistant → Fin/other support Agents - Account Management → Customer Success Platform 2/ Long-term we'll likely iterate towards replacing all of the add-ons with a credit-based system similar to Clay, where you buy packages of credits, where each credit can afford you an action (e.g. write a knowledge base article, draft a reply, ask AI a question, AI-tag an issue, etc.)

Darragh C.

CTO, Head of Engineering at Intercom, building Fin.ai

3mo

Curios - what's your approach been to preserving vs migrating accounts off old models? We've learned the hard way that accumulation of pricing models can be a heavy tax within your business and for customers too - would love to understand how others handle that.

shoutout to whoever is on the 7-times grandfathered legacy plan 😂

Harikrishna P

Sr. PMM @ Chargebee | Usage-based pricing, hybrid models & AI monetization

3mo

Marty Kausas Really interesting! Was there anything about your pricing that surprised you once customers started using the product? Maybe something you thought would work one way but turned out completely different in practice?

Ariela Bitran

Head of Monetization - At Chargebee

3mo

Marty Kausas thanks for sharing this journey with us! Curios what is your motivation to move into a token model? To me Token-based pricing is just cost-plus in an AI wrapper. which is understandable when your goal is to preserve margins rather than focusing on acquisition and adoption.

Giovanni Hobbins

Co-founder at Schematic

3mo

Marty Kausas Do you have a billing engineering team that is full time thinking about and building against these needs?

Kyle Neipp

Director of Customer Experience & Product Analytics @ Copysmith

3mo

As someone currently looking to move multiple teams to a new help desk & CRM, a few things struck me about Pylon pricing: - AI Assistants for internal teams as an add-on feels unnecessary & I wish were just part of the seat pricing. Most teams want basic AI features built in for efficiency, but if a seat appears to be $100 and then is REALLY $150 to get AI features, it can be frustrating. I've been close to defaulting to a tool like Help Scout just for the sheer simplicity of the pricing. - AI Agent being usage based makes sense. I do think it should be tied to an outcome rather than just contact being made. AI driven resolution guiding the price incentives the business to build what's most important to the customer ($ for truly resolved user inquiries).

Lisa Leyla Yerebakan

Turning Legacy into Leverage - Venture Building and Innovation for the Next Generation of Family Business Owners

3mo

This is so good - thanks for sharing this so transparently. Everyone who’s building something new knows these iterations. They are part of the process! Well done 🚀

Exciting. Credit-based pricing makes the math easy, but moves the complexity up in the sales cycle --> "How many credits will I need?" Build some clear Use cases for Pylon and estimate the number of credits per use case. That's the big unlock in enterprise deals 🧐

Like
Reply
Suvadeep Paul

LinkedIn ghostwriter + strategist.

3mo

Evolution is key in finding the right fit for your product and customers.

Like
Reply
See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories