The 90% Margin Paradox
Last Monday, I was on my monthly advisors call discussing design updates to our pricing page. This came right after I’d shared news about a big deal that forced me to rethink everything. The prospect didn’t want to manage individual licenses and requested per-campus pricing with unlimited users. I scrambled to create tiered pricing that decreased per campus as volume increased. I thought nothing of it—just a routine sales update.
Then I showed my advisors the pricing page.
I was expecting feedback on design, instead they spent 30 minutes dissecting our pricing model. Our PLG advisor asked a simple (but dangerous) question that made my head spin: “What if you offered unlimited licenses per school for a set price to reduce your sales cycle?”
My knee-jerk response was defensive: “We can’t do that. We’re on a single-user license model. We charge per user.” But the question haunted me all week. Why was I so attached to per-seat pricing when our margins could support almost any model?
Most SaaS founders dream of 90% gross margins. But when you achieve them, you discover something counterintuitive: they create more pricing problems than they solve.
The traditional business school approach to pricing (cost plus reasonable margin) becomes meaningless when your marginal cost approaches zero. A founder recently told me he spends more on coffee for his team each month than on server costs for all his customers. This isn’t a scaling problem; it’s a pricing philosophy crisis.
The Friction Trap
When you price per seat at $15/month, you think you’re being reasonable. After all, that’s less than a lunch. But watch what happens during a demo. The prospect gets excited about your product, then asks the fatal question: “How much for our 200-person team?”
Three thousand dollars a month suddenly doesn’t sound like lunch money. Worse, you’ve just killed your PLG motion. Nobody wants to be the person who adds $180 annually to the company budget every time they invite a colleague.
This is the paradox of per-seat pricing with high margins: it penalizes exactly the behavior you want to encourage (viral adoption within organizations).
The Figma Insight
Figma understood something profound about pricing software with negligible marginal costs. They realized that design collaboration has two types of users: creators and spectators. Spectators add zero incremental cost but drive viral adoption. So they made viewing free and charged only for editing.
This wasn’t generosity; it was strategic thinking. Every free viewer becomes a potential advocate for upgrading the team to more editor seats. The viral coefficient of their PLG motion increased dramatically because sharing had no cost friction.
The Notion Bet
Notion took this logic even further. Unlimited users for $8/month sounds insane until you understand their bet: they’re not monetizing people, they’re monetizing sophistication. A 1,000-person company can use basic Notion for $8/month total. But as they grow sophisticated—advanced permissions, integrations, analytics—they’ll upgrade to higher tiers.
This only works with extremely high margins. Notion can afford to have enterprise teams using their product essentially for free because they’re betting on feature expansion over time. Their unit economics make this sustainable in ways that would bankrupt a 20% margin business.
The Bootstrap Advantage
Interestingly, bootstrap founders often have more pricing flexibility than their venture-backed counterparts. Without investors demanding specific growth metrics, they can optimize for long-term sustainability over quarterly ARR targets.
When venture-backed competitors launch aggressive freemium models subsidized by investor capital, bootstrap founders with high margins can play a different game entirely. They can focus on building sustainable unit economics while competitors burn cash trying to buy market share.
The Enterprise Paradox
Here’s what nobody tells you about high-margin SaaS pricing: sometimes your biggest customers should pay the least per user. A 10-person team getting $50,000/year of value might happily pay $500/month. But a 500-person team getting $500,000/year of value will balk at $25,000/month, even though their per-user value is identical.
This violates our sense of fairness, but it reflects economic reality. Large organizations have different budget processes, approval chains, and price sensitivity. Your pricing model needs to account for these organizational dynamics, not just mathematical proportionality.
Finding Your Model
The right pricing strategy for high-margin SaaS depends on understanding your viral mechanics. Ask yourself:
Does value correlate with team size, or with usage intensity? Slack chose per-user because communication value increases with network size. But Superhuman chose flat-rate because email efficiency is personal, not collaborative.
What drives expansion within accounts? If it’s adding users, per-seat makes sense. If it’s feature sophistication, tier-based pricing works better. If it’s outcome achievement, consider usage-based or outcome-based models.
Where does friction kill adoption? Every pricing boundary creates adoption friction. The question is whether that friction prevents valuable usage or just prevents unprofitable usage.
The Uncomfortable Truth
The hardest part of pricing high-margin software isn’t finding the right price. It’s overcoming the psychological discomfort of charging far less than the value you create. When a founder realizes their $50/month tool saves customers $5,000/month, their instinct is to raise prices 10x. Sometimes that’s right, but often it misses the bigger opportunity.
The goal isn’t to capture maximum value from each customer today. It’s to remove every barrier to your product spreading through the market like a virus. With 90% margins, you can afford to optimize for ubiquity over unit economics, at least until you achieve market dominance.
The companies that understand this paradox (that high margins enable lower prices, not higher ones) often end up building the most valuable businesses. They sacrifice short-term revenue optimization for long-term market capture, betting that ubiquity beats margin optimization when your costs are near zero.
This is perhaps the most counterintuitive lesson of high-margin SaaS: your pricing strategy should be as much about what you don’t charge for as what you do.