.png)
Frameworks, core principles and top case studies for SaaS pricing, learnt and refined over 28+ years of SaaS-monetization experience.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In the fast-paced world of distributed systems, message queue services have become the backbone of modern applications. But one question consistently challenges both providers and consumers: how should these critical services price their throughput? This pricing decision impacts everything from customer adoption to provider profitability and can make or break messaging platforms in today's competitive landscape.
The Current State of Message Queue Pricing
Message queue services typically employ several different pricing models, each with its own advantages and drawbacks:
Per-Message Pricing
The most straightforward approach charges customers based on the number of messages processed. Amazon SQS, for example, charges $0.40 per million messages, making costs directly proportional to usage.
According to a 2022 Cloud Messaging Survey by TechValidate, 68% of enterprises prefer this model for its predictability and direct correlation to value received.
Data Volume-Based Pricing
Some services charge based on the amount of data transferred through the queue:
- Kafka on Confluent Cloud prices partially based on data storage and transfer
- Google Pub/Sub charges for data volume in addition to message count
This model makes sense for platforms handling varied message sizes, where a single large message consumes significantly more resources than a small one.
Throughput-Based Pricing
Here's where things get interesting. Throughput pricing models charge based on the capacity to process messages, typically measured in:
- Messages per second (MPS)
- Throughput units (like Azure Service Bus's Processing Units)
- Partitions or shards (common in event streaming platforms like Kafka)
According to Gartner's Market Guide for Event Stream Processing, throughput-based pricing has grown in popularity by 35% since 2020, particularly among enterprise customers with predictable workloads.
The Throughput Pricing Dilemma
Pricing based on throughput capacity presents unique challenges:
The Provisioned vs. Actual Usage Gap
When customers provision capacity, they typically overestimate their needs. Research from the FinOps Foundation found that cloud messaging services are overprovisioned by an average of 45% - creating inefficiency for customers while potentially increasing provider revenue.
Peak vs. Average Throughput
Most systems experience significant fluctuations in throughput requirements. A retail application might need 10x normal capacity during Black Friday sales events. How should providers price for these scenarios?
Best Practices for Throughput Pricing Models
Based on industry trends and customer preferences, here are the most effective approaches to message queue pricing with a focus on throughput:
1. Tiered Throughput Pricing
Offering tiered throughput levels (e.g., 100, 1,000, 10,000 MPS) with clear price breaks at each tier provides predictability for customers while ensuring profitability for providers.
RabbitMQ Cloud follows this model successfully, with 75% of their enterprise customers choosing mid-tier throughput options according to their 2022 usage report.
2. Hybrid Models
Combining base throughput allocation with burst capacity pricing offers the best of both worlds:
- Guaranteed capacity at a fixed rate
- Ability to handle spikes without pre-provisioning excessive capacity
- Pay-per-use pricing for exceeding baseline capacity
AWS Kinesis effectively implements this approach with provisioned shards plus on-demand capacity.
3. Auto-scaling with Price Protection
The most customer-friendly model might be auto-scaling with price caps:
- Systems automatically adjust capacity based on demand
- Monthly bills are capped at the equivalent cost of the next tier up
- Customers get the efficiency of precise provisioning with the predictability of fixed pricing
According to a 2023 Forrester report on messaging platforms, this pricing model showed the highest customer satisfaction scores across all surveyed providers.
Case Study: How Redis Enterprise Changed Their Pricing Model
Redis Enterprise initially charged purely based on data volume for their Redis Streams messaging capability. After customer feedback, they shifted to a hybrid model:
- Base throughput allocation included in standard pricing
- Additional throughput purchased in pre-defined increments
- Burst capacity available at premium rates
The results were compelling:
- 32% increase in customer adoption of messaging features
- 18% increase in average revenue per customer
- 28% reduction in support tickets related to unexpected bills
This real-world example demonstrates how thoughtful throughput pricing can benefit both providers and consumers.
What Works Best for Different Customer Segments
The ideal pricing model varies significantly by customer type:
Startups and SMBs
- Prefer pay-as-you-go, message-based pricing
- Value predictability and low barriers to entry
- Often choose services like CloudAMQP or IronMQ with straightforward pricing
Enterprise Customers
- Usually prefer throughput-based pricing for predictable budgeting
- Need guaranteed performance levels with SLAs
- Often select platforms like IBM MQ or Azure Service Bus with enterprise-grade features
High-Growth Scale-ups
- Benefit most from hybrid models with base capacity plus burst pricing
- Need flexibility as workloads grow rapidly
- Typically choose services like Amazon MQ or Google Pub/Sub
The Future of Message Queue Pricing
As event streaming and messaging platforms continue to evolve, we're seeing emerging trends in pricing models:
- Workload-aware pricing that charges differently for latency-sensitive vs. batch processing workloads
- Value-based pricing tied to business outcomes rather than technical metrics
- Consumption-based pricing that considers both throughput and compute resources used to process messages
Conclusion: Finding Your Pricing Sweet Spot
The ideal message queue pricing model balances several critical factors:
- Alignment with value: Customers should pay in proportion to the value received
- Predictability: Customers need to forecast costs accurately
- Flexibility: The model should accommodate varying workloads
- Simplicity: Pricing should be easy to understand and calculate
- Competitiveness: Pricing must compare favorably to alternatives
For most message queue services, a hybrid approach combining base throughput allocation with flexible scaling options provides the best balance of these factors. The most successful providers offer multiple pricing models, allowing customers to choose what works best for their specific use case.
By carefully considering how you price throughput, you can create a win-win scenario where customers feel they're getting fair value while your messaging platform remains profitable and competitive in this rapidly evolving market.