Salesforce, for example, is changing the software "pricing model".

Artificial intelligence is disrupting the subscription-based pricing model that has been used in the software industry for over two decades. Enterprise software giants, such as Salesforce, are being forced to shift from a fixed subscription fee model based on the number of users to charging based on usage and even actual business results—a shift that presents both opportunities and uncertainties.

According to a report by tech media outlet The Information on August 30, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff stated in an investor call last week that the company is allowing enterprise customers to choose their payment methods for its AI product, Agentforce, including signing customized contracts, charging based on revenue growth resulting from AI helping salespeople close more deals, or charging for cost savings through automated customer service.

"Customers want to buy and price in different ways, something I've come to realize very recently," Benioff said. This statement reflects the deep uncertainty surrounding software pricing models in the AI era.

This shift has triggered a chain reaction within the industry. According to reports, sources familiar with the matter revealed that OpenAI has recently begun offering some large clients the option to pay only after the AI completes the task; customer management startups Sierra and Fin (which Salesforce is acquiring for $3.6 billion) have also adopted a task-completion-only model; and programming assistant Cognition promises a credit of up to $10 million if it fails to deliver engineering results at least equivalent to the paid amount to enterprise clients.

Salesforce's stock price has risen by about 23% since its earnings report last week.

The subscription model is coming to an end.

This transformation by Salesforce signifies a fundamental challenge to the Software as a Service (SaaS) business model it has built.

Twenty-five years ago, Salesforce spearheaded a historic shift in the software industry, moving from one-time buy-out licenses to subscription fees based on the number of employees. This model reduced upfront costs for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and shifted the burden of software upgrades and maintenance to the vendor side, thus initiating a two-decade-long boom in the SaaS industry.

However, the rise of AI is reversing this logic. As enterprises increasingly use advanced AI agents such as Anthropic's Claude to handle complex tasks involving applications like Salesforce, the frequency of employees interacting directly with these applications is decreasing, and the subscription model that charges per user seat is losing its foundation.

Benioff acknowledged that software pricing is in a period of great uncertainty, and that Salesforce is following in the footsteps of startups rather than leading change.

Moving towards "pricing based on results"

The new model that Salesforce is currently exploring is highly similar to the long-standing practices of data analytics software company Palantir.

Palantir signs highly customized contracts with enterprise clients, combining fixed fees with usage- and business-results-based pricing. Benioff stated that this flexible pricing approach has helped Salesforce "sign very large deals," noting that suppliers can "get very high prices" for their products under this model—a conclusion supported by Palantir's significant revenue growth over the past year.

Benioff further elaborated on his understanding of "pricing results":

"We don't just want to say, 'We've completed so many calls, so we'll charge you $2.' We want to be able to say, 'We've helped you increase your earnings so much, so we'll charge you $2 because we've helped you earn $20 or $40.'"

This means that Salesforce's goal is to deeply link its revenue with the business results of its customers, rather than simply charging based on the completion of tasks.

Claudeforce: New Strategies on a New Battlefield

Facing pressure from AI native competitors like Anthropic, Salesforce launched Claudeforce last week—a service that allows customers to use Claude directly to complete a large number of tasks involving Salesforce applications without having to directly operate those applications.

According to reports, sources familiar with the matter revealed that Salesforce plans to build a revenue mechanism through Claudeforce: Salesforce will benefit whenever a third-party AI accesses data within Salesforce applications; customers will need to upgrade to a higher subscription tier to enable this feature.

The strategic intent behind this move is that even if users no longer directly use the Salesforce interface, the company can still maintain its core position in the AI ecosystem at the data level, turning potential user churn risks into new monetization opportunities.

Attribution Debate: Potential Hidden Dangers of New Models

The report states that while the outcome-based pricing model is theoretically attractive, it may lead to complex attribution disputes in practice.

Payment service provider Stripe has issued guidelines clarifying that sales conversions or other business results "may stem from product adjustments, marketing campaigns, or seasonal factors," rather than contributions from the software itself.

" Unless the attribution rules are clearly defined, customers may dispute whether the results should be attributed to the software vendor ," Stripe said.

This potential problem is not without precedent. Software monitoring company Splunk experienced a period of revenue decline during its transition from a licensing model to a subscription model. Analysts believe that the outcome of this current pricing model experiment will largely determine whether established enterprise software companies like Salesforce can successfully reinvent themselves in the face of the AI wave.

Extend the image and increase its resolution.Risk Warning and DisclaimerInvesting involves risk; please exercise caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific circumstances. Any investment decisions made based on this information are at your own risk.