SemiAnalysis finds consumer AI subscriptions subsidize heavy users with up to 70x more token value than standard APIs

Subscription plans are massively subsidized.

And by massively, I mean absurdly:

Claude Max 20x: $200/month, with usage reportedly worth around $8,000

ChatGPT Pro 20x: $200/month, with usage reportedly worth around $14,000

Recently, we purchased one of each Anthropic/OpenAI subscription plan and randomly ran long horizon coding tasks until we exhausted the weekly limit. It's widely believed that a $200/month plan maxes out at ~$2000/month worth of tokens (assuming API pricing). However, we found that the subscriptions are actually far more generous. (2/4)

honestly fuck semianalysis for this

now they are going to kill limits

The margin on a subscription plan is a function of the average utilization. If we assume both companies have 75% API gross margins, this results in the following subscription margins. (3/4)

Obviously this is way worse than API overall. However, explicitly nerfing subscriptions leads to huge public backlash, and the rapidly falling cost of intelligence means you'll be able to profitably serve Opus 4.8 level models for $20/month in the near future. We therefore think it's far more likely the labs will withhold new features/models from subscription plans. It will be interesting to see if Mythos ends up being API only. (4/4)

Tokens will be 2-10x cheaper every year

As such, it’s perfectly logical to get folks addicted to your product now and raise prices later — or simply let Moore's law do its thing

Interesting claim from SemiAnalysis.

AI subscriptions are dramatically underpriced versus API usage:

- For heavy coding/chat users, the subscription can be 40–70× cheaper than paying API rates; the API is mainly better when you need automation or product integration.

- a $200/month ChatGPT Pro plan can provide about $14,000/month of API-equivalent usage, while a $200/month Claude Max 20x plan can provide about $8,000/month.

OpenAI subs being roughly 2x Anthropic subs checks out

You could say that, but at same time API prices are likely significantly inflated and many users of sub plans probably not using it all too. In the end the math is working out for these companies. And doubt it will change much in future, at least regarding models of similiar scales as opus 4.8/gpt 5.5 - if we get some 10T or 20T models those might not make sense to even sell as part of sub anymore. But don't think most users even need those anyway.

@SemiAnalysis_ This tracks with my last 3 months

@SemiAnalysis_ so what youre saying is when theyre done using us for training, all the normies will be rugged out of the system

@PawelJLisowski good call and i agree. many people subscribe to $20 or $20 and dont even use their weekly rates.

This is in line with my understanding. Subsidization is a lot more intense than most people think. AI is extremely expensive.

Will be a big shocker when Anthropic and OpenAI stop subsidizing.

One engineer can easily spend $100k of tokens/year

@SemiAnalysis_ However the point of subscriptions is that MOST users don't use the quota they paid for. It's like buffets where heavy eaters are subsidized by 99% of the population not eating their fair share.

obviously, maximally utilized subscriptions are negative. but I think the negative margin isn't that dramatic anymore (because it's too easy to max out with agents now). I'd say current subscriptions must be profitable up to ≈35% utilization.

@scaling01 The rug pull is coming… sooner or later.

this is about what i thought. people regularly used to report $10k+ API equivalent via ccusage

@kimmonismus Not really. These plans take into account that not every user will use it 24/7.

@SemiAnalysis_ hey check this out