Why We Chose Credit-Based Pricing

## Introduction: The AI Pricing Problem Pricing AI services is notoriously difficult. Costs vary dramatically based on query complexity, model usage, and computational resources. Traditional pricing models—per-request, subscription, or usage-based—each have significant drawbacks when applied to AI. After extensive research and experimentation, we settled on credit-based pricing for Llama-Search. Here's why. --- ## The Problems with Traditional Models ### Per-Request Pricing Charging a flat fee per request seems simple, but AI queries vary wildly in cost. A simple factual lookup might use 500 tokens; a deep research synthesis might use 10,000. Flat pricing either overcharges for simple queries or loses money on complex ones. ### Subscription Models Monthly subscriptions provide revenue predictability but create misaligned incentives. Users who barely use the service subsidize power users. And what happens when someone needs just 10 searches per month? They shouldn't pay for unlimited access. ### Pure Usage-Based (Token Pricing) Charging per token is accurate but unpredictable. Users can't budget effectively when they don't know how many tokens a query will consume. It creates anxiety and friction. --- ## The Credit Solution Credits solve these problems by creating a **bounded unit of value**: | Search Type | Credits | What You Get | |-------------|---------|--------------| | Basic | 2 | Quick answer, 2 sources | | Standard | 5 | Detailed answer, 3-4 sources | | Extensive | 12 | Comprehensive research, 5+ sources | Users know exactly what they're paying before each search. No surprises. --- ## Benefits We've Observed ### 1. Predictable Budgeting Teams can allocate credits per project, per user, or per time period. Finance departments love this—they can budget AI costs just like any other resource. ### 2. Aligned Incentives Users choose the appropriate search depth for each query. Need a quick fact? Use Basic. Doing serious research? Use Extensive. The cost matches the value. ### 3. No Wasted Spend Unlike subscriptions, unused credits don't expire (in most plans). Users pay for what they need, when they need it. ### 4. Simple Mental Model "This search costs 5 credits" is easier to understand than "This search will cost approximately $0.0847 based on estimated token usage." --- ## Implementation Details Our credit system includes several features: **Transparent Pricing**: Credit costs are shown before each search in our API playground. **Real-Time Balance**: API responses include remaining credit balance. **Low Balance Alerts**: We notify users when credits run low. **Bulk Discounts**: Larger credit packages offer better per-credit rates. --- ## What We Learned Credit-based pricing isn't perfect. Some users initially find it unfamiliar. But once they use it, the feedback is consistently positive: > "I finally feel in control of my AI costs." — Developer feedback > "We can give each team member a credit budget and let them use it how they see fit." — Enterprise customer --- ## Conclusion AI pricing should be as intelligent as AI itself—adapting to actual usage while remaining predictable and fair. Credit-based pricing achieves this balance. We'll continue refining our model based on user feedback. If you have thoughts on how we can improve, we'd love to hear from you. Check out our pricing page to see current credit packages.

🍪 We value your privacy

Cookie Preferences

Essential Cookies

Analytics Cookies

More Articles

Building Intelligent Search with AI

Designing APIs for AI-Powered Search

Ready to try AI-powered search?