Back to Research

PLG pricing analysis - seats vs usage

about 2 years ago 2 mins read
Adam Schoenfeld
Adam Schoenfeld

*Thank you being part of PeerSignal research.

Welcome back to my almost-weekly newsletter where I share data and examples to help you study B2B sales and marketing.*


This week I dug into 125 PLG pricing models with Bryan Belanger (XaaS Pricing).

We focused this analysis on seats and usage -- how they work together, common models, and variants.

**Flip the summary deck here.** 📊

There is no single PLG pricing playbook, but some interesting patterns showed up...

* PLG models usually rely on seats, usage, or both to drive conversion and upgrade.

Here's how our sample breaks down with a few role models in each bucket:

* The SaaS 1.0 gold standard still reigns -- 58% have seats-based pricing.

* Only 6% of our sample are pure usage-based pricing (i.e.

metered and charged per unit).

But "some" usage-based shows up in 28%

* 74% have usage-based *tiering* (i.e.

not metered, but usage factors are packaged into plans/tiers).

I highlighted a few examples in the deck.

UBT can be layered into every core pricing model.

We see companies like Slack, Miro, and Docusign with usage tiering in a seat-based model.

Companies like Zapier, Bubble, and Airmeet roll UBT into their flat-fee packaging.

And UBT can be combined with usage-based (metered) models like MongoDB, Pantheon, and New Relic.

* As companies scale, they tend to increase the number of usage factors.

You can download my Excel sheet of 125 PLG companies and/or Bryan's monster sheet of 300 SaaS pricing models if you want to dig deeper.

*Want more PLG and B2B pricing analysis here?* We'll keep pulling this thread based on your feedback.

I read all replies.