Remix.run Logo
simonw 4 hours ago

I'm not sure what you're pushing back against here.

I spent $200. If I had been paying API pricing it would have been $2,180.16. The article is about how enterprise customers get charged API pricing, which means if I had been employed by one of those companies I would have cost them $2,180.16.

What am I missing?

eqvinox 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Just because API pricing would've been $2180.16 doesn't mean that's the value of those tokens. For starters, you personally probably wouldn't have paid that. But also, sales price isn't value. This is like saying, oh, I saw this bar of gold somewhere for $10000 but got it here for $1000! So I got $10000 worth of gold for $1000! - no, the value of that gold is determined by its weight, which wasn't even mentioned.

We have no market convergence on tokens yet (and it'll differ between LLMs), so it's impossible to say what value you got for your $200.

aspenmartin 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

He's saying he's getting a great deal...a token from Opus on Claude code is the same as a token from Opus on the API. I remain as confused as Simon. He's not talking about "here's the ROI I got from my $100 subscription" it's "here's how much I saved from getting the monthly subscription instead of sending things through an API".

jonnat 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No, value is determined by what participants in a market are willing to pay for something. The only reason you are able to say that the value of gold is determined by its weight is that gold is a commodity and no matter what you paid for it you'll find others willing to pay market price.

Simon is saying that companies are (today) willing to pay API prices for tokens which is as good as any determination of value.

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
remus 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Just because API pricing would've been $2180.16 doesn't mean that's the value of those tokens.

You seem to be suggesting the price of tokens is entirely disconnected to the cost of providing the service? I don't see much basis for that assumption.

recursive 13 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm willing to charge you $100k for those same tokens.

Does that mean you'll be saving $99k?

It sounds an awful lot like the mark-up to mark-down scheme where the price stays the same.

OrangeDelonge 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Large enterprises make deals and won’t be paying 2,180.16$ either. Just like with AWS

simonw 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That doesn't seem to be the case. From what I've seen enterprise deals get API pricing now. Have you seen evidence that's not true?

roomey 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Hi Simon, nice article. The parent there may be making the same assumption I am, that large enterprise _never_ pays sticker price.

Also, to just color in the picture here, as I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere, there is a very large Saas company at the moment who has given everyone unlimited tokens on Claude. And they have a dashboard showing who spends the most. So the "budget" went from about USD500 per per person (split between Claude and cursor) in Jan to... Well a soft limit of USD100k... Per month... Per person.

People can still see the top line sticker price on their spend, but honestly I can't believe that the Saas is paying that full price when the invoice comes in.

That said, there are some finance reports which are probably dropping soon where we will find out!

simonw 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> The parent there may be making the same assumption I am, that large enterprise _never_ pays sticker price.

I shared that assumption until yesterday, when I found out that it wasn't holding for LLM pricing from OpenAI and Anthropic. That's what inspired me to write this piece.

I think those token leaderboards are an obviously terrible idea and will go extinct very quickly now that people are paying attention to costs.

wongarsu 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But the feature list at https://claude.com/pricing#team-&-enterprise literally lists "tiered incentives on committed spend" and "non-standard terms" as perks of the sales-assisted Enterprise plan. Maybe "non-standard terms" could mean "we dance for you if you pay", but what would "tiered incentives on committed spend" mean besides "we can negotiate on price if you bring the volume"

asib 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> > The parent there may be making the same assumption I am, that large enterprise _never_ pays sticker price.

> I shared that assumption until yesterday, when I found out that it wasn't holding for LLM pricing from OpenAI and Anthropic.

This reads like GP saying "enterprise never pays sticker price" and you responding "I thought so too until I saw the sticker price".

Is there some info you have that you can't/didn't share? Your article doesn't offer anything beyond the above.

simonw 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

You'd have to buy a subscription to The Information, but this is useful: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/anthropic-changes-pr...

> With the pricing change, customers of Claude Enterprise, a two-year-old bundle of products meant for large companies that now includes Claude Code and its work assistant, Claude Cowork, will have to pay for the amount of computing capacity they consume while using the software on top of a monthly flat fee of $20 per user, an Anthropic spokesperson confirmed.

There was a Hacker News thread the other day where a bunch of people confirmed that their organizations had seen this too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48278610#48280906

mvanbaak 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

large enterprises dont pay openai or anthropic, they get this thing called copilot and get a nice price there. At least on this side of the pond (eu)

themgt 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I do know of moderate-size companies deploying OSS LLMs on their own GPU clusters, for ownership/security/maybe cost reasons. I'm somewhat surprised F500 companies are apparently just handing over all their data to the model providers.

Could be fantastic for small shops while it lasts. The big guys have to pay 10x for precious tokens.

waisbrot 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And "large" just means that AWS will assign an account manager to talk with you. I was at a start-up who spent $300k/year on AWS and that was enough to get special attention and discounts. Enterprise pricing is confusing.

apsurd 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The point is that those a real prices real people are paying for real API usage. it's not made up.

your point is large players won't pay those prices at massive volume. ok

Anon1096 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Claude is so in demand at the moment that there aren't really volume discounts. Anthropic sets the terms and you either accept them or get lost they have that much of a lead (mindshare/desirability wise).

altruios 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If I had been paying API pricing it would have been $2,180.16

The point being made above is that API pricing is calculated... somehow... seemingly arbitrarily. Possibly untethered to the infrastructure costs entirely: which would be the basis of any 'value', however that holds the labor theory of value, which isn't accurate either. So how do you accurately price these tokens at all (other than through price-discovery: which is slow, messy and fuzzy)?

NitpickLawyer 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> So how do you accurately price these tokens at all

Like anything else in the economy: at the point where enough customers can pay you, and not enough will go to the cheaper competition.

altruios 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

> at the point where enough customers can pay you

> (other than through price-discovery: which is slow, messy and fuzzy)

I notice a distinct lack of reading or comprehension (from everyone around me now, not just this comment) which worries me. I worry if LLM's are to blame. No one reads anymore...

827a 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

simonw 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Fun fact: the $20/month subscription fee for ChatGPT Pro - which set the standard for at least a couple of years - really was an arbitrary decision made based on a Google form: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Aug/12/nick-turley/

pembrook 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

API pricing drops DRAMATICALLY in enterprise agreements.

As with pretty much anything priced on volume/usage.

Enterprise deals are negotiated ad-hoc, the listed pricing is simply a jumping off point for the final negotiated discount.

If you’re going to give 20,000 employees Claude code you are not going to be spending $1B per year on Anthropic tokens as if you gave everyone an individual API key. Just as Anthropic isn’t paying AWS SES $10,000,000 to send 1 email update to their massive user base when the next Claude version drops.

taude 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This isn't true at the moment, though. So far there hasn't been the negotiating power. What happens is you end up capping usage for employees at a fixed amount. I think eventually, prices will come down and there will be discounts, but for enterprise accounts at least of our size (<5000), we're paying almost 100% retail, which kind of sucks, because it's expensive, and pretty easy to burn $50 to $100+ in a day, if you're not careful. In fact we got pushed off the former plan to the token-utility one at the last contract negotiation.

Going to be interesting to determing the metrics we give to engineers for determining whether the spend on this is worth it. Measuring PRs, lines of code committed, commits fully generated by agentic workflows, etc.....

simonw 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> API pricing drops DRAMATICALLY in enterprise agreements

Do you have any numbers or reports to back that up?

lrae an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Just as Anthropic isn’t paying AWS SES $10,000,000 to send 1 email update

How much do you think emails cost? That number is just so far off?

But besides that, running SES is also quite a bit cheaper than SOTA ai models with high demand (and comparatively) no competition. And quite a bit more pressure to make money (soon).

rtgfhyuj 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

xnorswap 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Have you or I misunderstood the "teams" plan?

edit: I missed the "enterprise" feature matrix with the usual audit/compliance stuff to force the biggest enterprise customers onto enterprise plans. Otherwise the "teams" plan is much better value for any business.

orig-continued:

https://claude.com/pricing/team

Teams premium is "Everything in standard, plus more usage*"

And from my experience, it's a very generous usage, I've only hit the limits once or twice, and both times required multi-boxing agents.

I could single-window agentic development all day on opus-4.7 auto-mode without hitting limits.

If you're a business using claude, then that seems like the right plan, the enteprise/API plan seems more suited to where your product is built on top of the agent themselves, so seats/limits aren't really meaningful?

nr378 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Claude Teams and Claude Enterprise are 2 distinct plans. Simon is right that Enterprise seats have no included usage (and so all usage is charged at API billing rates), whereas Teams seats do.