Provide a plan without AI functionality

kirkmc

Thibaultmol they didn't increase the price when they added certain ai features

Well this is true, new users coming to Kagi aren’t aware of this. I can understand people seeing the price and thinking that they’re paying for something that they’re not going to use, if they don’t plan to use the AI features.

InternetChunk

Thibaultmol Other than that isn't AI being used to "enhance" search results, change or show them in any way? I hope it's not.

Max

Thibaultmol they didn't increase the price when they added certain ai features.

If they didn't increase prices when they introduced AI features they where simply overcharging before.

Lets not pretend here, It costs Kagi a considerable amount of developer hours (and thus money) to implement and maintain these features, and queries to LLM APIs is in general much more expensive than search APIs (excluding free tiers).

What I'm saying is that users that don't utilise the AI features are being overcharged/subsidising the AI users, which people don't like nor might be comfortable with, if for example they are opposed to funding AI.

carl

Max If they didn't increase prices when they introduced AI features they where simply overcharging before.

Every company charges more for their product than what it costs to make it. That's basic business. If you couldn't make a profit from your product, there wouldn't be any point. A hundred percent of products you have ever purchased in your life is "overcharging".

For us as customers, it doesn't make any difference if a company is making a big profit on us or a small profit. What matters to us is if the product is worth the price we're paying. To me Kagi is worth the price easily. If it's not worth the price to you, then don't buy it.

Max

Why cant we just have a "normal unlimited" and "unlimited + AI" plans?

And yes, the normal unlimited is supposed to be cheaper; the cost difference being representative of the cost of implementing AI features and paying for LLM APIs

Isn't search Kagi:s core business? How is it not possible to buy just the core service?

Boomkop3

Making the price difference minor, like 1$ or 50 cents, it has two benefits:

It gives those who do not like AI a non-ai option
It makes the AI option look like a better deal than it is

It's a pretty old marketing trick, it makes it a lot more likely for people to buy the xxl version when there is a just-barely-not-xxl version.

InternetChunk

Boomkop3 I don’t think that’s a big enough change. I would say at least $2 less for the non AI option otherwise people buying unlimited without AI when the difference is 50cents could feel scammed and think they are being overcharged for less features.

justneedausername

Boomkop3 I would fully support this. Though maybe their own metrics tell them enough of a story about who is using AI and who isn't. I suppose my frustration would be that at some point, the money I'm paying is subsidizing development in or us of AI, which is my primary concern.

kirkmc

In a discussion on the Discord last week, looking at my search and AI stats, Vlad pointed out that at around 1,000 a month, I'm probably costing more than the $10 I pay. My AI usage was about $0.02 for the month, and I had asked the question about the cost related to AI tokens. I hadn't realized that search was so expensive; he said between 1 and 1.5 cents per search. So a non-AI plan might lose more money.

This said, I'm sure there are people who want the option to stay as far away from AI as possible.

blahblahblahkagi

The only thing I would want to use kagi for is as a search engine, not for using ai. In fact I don't want any of my money going to these ai companies, because of their unethical practices. I feel it would be greatly beneficial for an option of Kagi that doesn't have any ai(as in llms and generative ai) as I assume it's a costly feature that some consumers like me dislike.

2 main ways it should go about

Completly remove ai as a feature for the user with a cheaper price
Only have open source llms not developed by major for profit companies: more expensive than first option but still should be more affordable

extra info: a checkmark when purchasing kagi whether or not to include ai rather than a dedicated plan without ai would makes more sense to me but either would be cool.

Users who don't use ai features don't have to pay for them, and people who actively dislike ai would consider kagi as an option for their search engine
N/A Kagi is paid, other search engines are typically free

3.N/a

scumpsmallbrain

Just made an account on the feedback forum specifically to suggest this; good to see I'm not alone. At $10 a month Kagi is my most expensive subscription, so when I see all these AI features that are maybe a neat novelty for a few weeks but I could totally live without, my wallet aches a little.

nichu42

scumpsmallbrain It was the same price without AI access.

Dustin

scumpsmallbrain Worth quoting Vlad's interview on Intelligent Machines

First of all, ai has been part of search for decades, and we are talking here about generative AI, the latest breed, the LLMs, which have been controversial mostly because of their tendency to hallucinate, so using them in information consumption scenarios is not really optimal all the time. And from day one when LLMs became a thing in late 2022, we had this thing called the AI integration philosophy. It basically said we're going to treat AI as a tool and it's going to be on demand only, so we're not going to push it down user throats. And if people want to use it, they certainly can.

As has been said on this feedback forum many times, we customers are paying for quality search, which is expensive to provide. The new hype of AI tools are just that. Tools. Don't want them? Don't use them as far as I'm concerned.

marc-eu

Dustin Don't want them? Don't use them as far as I'm concerned.

The problem is that every AI search/chat costs Kagi (much) more money than a classic search request. That has to be paid somehow, so that's reflected in the calculated subscription fee.

If AI wasn't uncluded, the subscription fee could probably be lower. So, users who don't use AI are somehow paying for users that do.

So I agree with the OP's question.

[deleted]

Dustin Don't use them as far as I'm concerned.

This doesn't resolve any AI controversies around ethics, the environment, and more.

It’s not a solution, it’s just ignoring the issues...

Boomkop3

justneedausername Kagi's in house development is more of a wrapper around existing services. If you don't use the Kagi AI features, then Kagi won't be calling on AI services on your behalf and so your money does not go there

carl

How about a more expensive non-AI plan? I think that is the more correct approach. If we want a company to offer us something more customized from their standard products, we are generally charged more. Those people who are passionate about not using AI would not mind paying a little more for their peace of mind.

marc-eu

« Previous Page Next Page »