Why tech companies never price things according to what they really cost. This new strategy of entering the market at a loss and then cranking up prices is getting old.
Various cost-saving measures have been discussed, including a separate Assistant plan.
Again, it will be priced according to how much the market will deem fit, which is less than what it costs at the moment.
The training data flywheel though was probably as or even more important at least as of whenever it was that they switched it to opt out instead of opt in on subsidized subscriptions.
One thing is offering free demos or discounted products for a short time and a different one is making your consumers believe that the current price is the long term price.
I just want transparency. Are they done increasing prices?
The initial announcement said it would only be available to subscriptions for a few weeks. The extra usage they said was for a limited time, I think it was 50% extra and they now are reducing that by 17%, less reduction than they had said.
Because it's a monthly plan they usually have given heads up of at least a month on stuff.
The API prices outside of personal subscription have always been more. Personal subscriptions are likely there for data scraping of company codebases (when users don't opt out), and for spreading the product to then get picked up by businesses the users work at or other word of mouth for API prices which they have said are profitable.
--
The question is probably more: How can it be legal to offer a service without specifying exactly what you're getting?