Packaging Choice Cards — Per-Seat Or Consumption Pricing (Infographic)
Best for: a pricing committee deciding between two commercial models Avoid when: the models will be blended (show the blend instead) Answers: what each model does to revenue predictability and to customer behaviour
infographic compare-binary-horizontal-badge-card-vs
theme
colorPrimary #2b66c4
palette
- #2b66c4
- #2f9e44
- #f3a33c
- #d1242f
- #7048e8
- #0f9b9b
- #c16f8a
- #7c5a3d
data
title Pricing Model Decision
desc Choose the primary motion, not the only motion
compares
- label Per seat
desc Predictable, familiar to buyers
children
- label Recurring revenue is forecastable
- label Growth tied to customer hiring
- label Penalises occasional users
- label Consumption
desc Aligned to value delivered
children
- label Revenue grows with usage
- label Forecasting needs real telemetry
- label Bill anxiety slows adoptionData Shape
Two compares entries with three statements each. The vs marker variant sets the two sides against each
other explicitly — use it for genuine either/or decisions.
Key Options
| Option | Effect |
|---|---|
infographic compare-binary-horizontal-badge-card-vs |
Badge cards with a "vs" divider |
compare-binary-horizontal-simple-vs |
Text-only variant for internal memos |
compare-binary-horizontal-underline-text-fold |
Underlined labels, folded layout |
Pitfalls
- ❌ Treating hybrid pricing as a third option → ✅ pick the dominant motion, then describe the add-on
- ❌ Only financial arguments → ✅ behavioural effects (bill anxiety) decide adoption
- ❌ Missing forecastability → ✅ that is the first question finance will ask
Alternatives
| Variant | Use instead |
|---|---|
| Tier ladder already decided | subscription-tiers-wheel.md |
| Partner tier comparison | partner-tiers-pyramid.md |
| Revenue plan under the chosen model | revenue-staircase-plan.md |