Would you pay less if you knew your provider was using AI?

[Data Swami]

Just did a webinar with a few other AI people for Marketing agencies and we have an interesting discussion about pricing.

So they all have varying ways in which they price up their services and some price per hour or days effort etc.

We were talking about the "right" way of using AI with having governance in place so you dont start putting client data into free tools and using AI and automation to help speed up some of the work they do but focused on human review and ensuring the same quality as if they had done it themselves.

But the idea of how that affects the revenue they make and what questions their customers should be asking with AI becoming far more prevalent in their industry. So my view is always you should be billing for outcomes rather than "time". The means to how we get to that outcome can be different but you are paying for the experience the person has and that applies to their usage of tools aswell to get the best outcome for the client. So if they are using AI in the right way delivering high value outputs and outcomes then the use of AI should not matter. Now if they are using AI to just speed up dross then sure their clients definitely have something to question. Or you focus pricing on results but then in the social media world that is so subjective and can fluctuate wildly from industry to industry.

What do you guys think?

 

[Mark T Jones]

I generally go with the view that bad decisions are made by worrying about how the supplier makes their money. So agree, it's about outcomes.

Outcomes which will definitely include security, accuracy, relevance etc.

On the other hand, I suspect that liberal use of AI will have a downward impact on pricing.

 

[Ozzy]

I suspect that liberal use of AI will have a downward impact on pricing

This is my concern, and my thoughts are aligned with Mark's, in that for a quality service I don't actually care if AI is used or not. I'm interested in the results.

The worse example I've ever seen is an 'AI' law firm, which proudly displays a selection their team who are all AI's. That is an instant turn off for me where AI appears to be used as a selling technique, but it alienates me. I want to chat with someone with years of experience, to understand my needs and advise me. I won't get that level of confidence from an AI, and my fear would be that it won't be sufficiently trained. I want to deal with a person, but I don't mind if that person uses AI (correctly as you say @Data Swami ) to support them as a tool in their role.

Right now, all I see, as you've seen yourself on here, some people are using AI incorrectly, expecting some magic bullet to do their job for them with AI folks making wild claims.

 

[fisicx]

There are an increasing number of businesses selling themselves as AI Free. The argument appears to be on choosing an internationally recognised logo.

But…

If AI is used to improve the quality of the service that’s not a problem as long as there is an improvement and not just a lazy way to make money.

 

[Mark T Jones]

There are an increasing number of businesses selling themselves as AI Free. The argument appears to be on choosing an internationally recognised logo.

But…

If AI is used to improve the quality of the service that’s not a problem as long as there is an improvement and not just a lazy way to make money.

That's precisely what I'm doing - though it an antidote rather than an anti

Tech/AI will definitely make parts of the market quicker, slicker and potentially cheaper. I've positioned myself at the slow end of the market

 

[GLAbusiness]

I think there’s a mistake emerging in how AI is being used commercially.

Using AI to create the end product for your customer is a poor strategy The logical consequence is that the customer soon realises that he could cut out the middle man.

Equally promoting a product as AI free is a strategy which usually delivers sub optimal results

The real value lies somewhere between the two extremes.

The two simple rules I have found useful are:

1. pick out the nuggets of gold in the AI result. Use AI to accelerate thinking, explore options, and surface ideas — not to replace judgement.
2. Be wary of AI’s tendency to overstate your competence
AI is naturally encouraging and often reinforces your thinking.
That can feel helpful, but it can also reduce critical challenge and lead to overconfidence.

The key message is to apply judgement, context, and experience to shape something better

 

[DontAsk]

Would you pay less for someone using Xero rather than a pen and paper ledger?

It's really no different. AI is just a another tool.

I don't care what tools a provider uses but price will be one factor when choosing a provider.

 

[Data Swami]

I think there’s a mistake emerging in how AI is being used commercially.

Using AI to create the end product for your customer is a poor strategy The logical consequence is that the customer soon realises that he could cut out the middle man.

Equally promoting a product as AI free is a strategy which usually delivers sub optimal results

The real value lies somewhere between the two extremes.

The two simple rules I have found useful are:

1. pick out the nuggets of gold in the AI result. Use AI to accelerate thinking, explore options, and surface ideas — not to replace judgement.
2. Be wary of AI’s tendency to overstate your competence
AI is naturally encouraging and often reinforces your thinking.
That can feel helpful, but it can also reduce critical challenge and lead to overconfidence.

The key message is to apply judgement, context, and experience to shape something better

Way I see it is we have two extremes. What I would call the AI charlatans (who are somewhat the noisiest) and then the other side of the coin thoroughly anti AI for various reasons which that could be because of what the charlatans spout.

I think we can be anti AI in certain areas of our businesses but a complete ban for me feels contrived. Like saying I'm anti digital world and will only go with written media

 

[fisicx]

From the register yesterday:

AI still doesn't work very well in business, reckoning soon

interview: Codestrap founders say we need to dial down the hype and sort through the mess

www.theregister.com

They discuss paying less if you used generative AI but also:

"Insurance underwriters are seriously trying now to remove coverage in policies where AI is applied and there's no clear chain of responsibility," said Smiley. "So now let's imagine you're the big four and you do get sued and you are having pricing pressure applied, the market's outpacing your ability to adapt, and now your underwriters are telling you, 'oh by the way we're not going to cover you.'"

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

If I was getting results, I wouldn't worry about whether AI was being used.

 

[Ozzy]

It does appear from all threads on here that cover AI, that the real issue where people don't know how to use AI effectively and properly. Effectively being not getting it setup with a clearly defined and realistic objective, and not properly being setup and configured, and controlled to reliably achieve that objective.

Sounds no different from when everyone said you needed a 'website' in the 1990's so everyone had a website built, and was paying £1,000 per page, so a 5x page website was £5,000 (and yes people paid that because that was what people said was needed to be successful in business).
Now we have people saying we need to use AI so people quickly load up ChatGPT and suddenly they are 'using AI'.

My view is absolutely yes, everyone should seriously consider and look into whether AI will be of benefit to their business. But do it properly, and planned - just like building a website - will that website feed into your marketing strategy?

 

[Data Swami]

From the register yesterday:

AI still doesn't work very well in business, reckoning soon

interview: Codestrap founders say we need to dial down the hype and sort through the mess

www.theregister.com

They discuss paying less if you used generative AI but also:

Its a bit rich from Insurance companies that XD. They were caught not too long ago using dodgy algorithms full of bias for their underwriting

 

[fisicx]

Its a bit rich from Insurance companies that XD. They were caught not too long ago using dodgy algorithms full of bias for their underwriting

And the big four accountants caught with their trousers down, the auto industry, utility companies and everyone else - they are all dodgy. And of course the tech industry breaking the law is so many ways then just paying fines and carrying on regardless.