Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by maronato 432 days ago
It’s the exact opposite. They are incurring a huge amount of risk with this.

6 hours ago most users didn’t have access to this feature at all. Now we have $4-8 of raw token credits a month to use on a well-built feature.

I’m paying $9 a month with the annual subscription, and it was worth it just for Search. Now they’re giving me $17 worth of value for the same price.

Their margins must be razor thin, and they’re only able to offer this much value because they’re counting on most people not using all credits. If everyone did, or if they gave rebates, they’d go out of business.

2 comments

The other point of view is that they are now forcing users to pay for both search and AI, even if they do not want to use or fund the development of the later. You used to be paying 9$ for search, now you are paying 9$ - x for search and an unknown amount for AI.
Probably a lot of subscribers that will never use it, like myself.
For myself at least I agreed to the original price.

If more features are added and I don't use the but other people do, as long as the features I pay for stays, I'm happy.