Pricing

Top Y Combinator Alumni Companies and Their Pricing Strategies

Jan 21, 2026

‍

Below is an analysis of 28 top Y Combinator alumni companies (chosen for their valuation, influence, or popularity) and how each approaches pricing. Each section summarizes the company’s pricing model (freemium, subscription, usage-based, tiered, etc.), any notable pivots or innovations in pricing, and the target market segment that the pricing is tailored for.

Airbnb

· Marketplace Commission Model: Airbnb operates an online marketplace for accommodations. Its revenue comes from service fees on bookings, historically split between hosts and guests. Under the long-time “split fee” structure, hosts paid ~3% and guests ~14–16% on each booking[1].

· Pricing Pivot – Host-Only Fee: In recent years, Airbnb moved to a host-only fee model (around 15% of the booking subtotal) for many professional hosts, eliminating the separate guest fee to make prices more transparent[2]. By late 2025, Airbnb standardized a 15.5% host fee for most listings, simplifying pricing so guests see an all-in price[1][2].

· Dynamic Pricing Tools: Airbnb provides hosts with pricing suggestions and allows use of smart pricing algorithms. This helps hosts adjust nightly rates based on demand, though hosts ultimately set prices. The platform’s fee structure and tools encourage hosts to price competitively for travelers.

· Target Segment: Airbnb’s pricing model targets consumers (travelers) seeking accommodations, while also accommodating professional hosts/property managers. The transparent pricing pivot (no guest fee) was especially aimed at attracting hotels and professional hospitality operators who prefer upfront pricing to guests, aligning Airbnb more with enterprise hospitality standards.

Stripe

· Usage-Based (Transactional) Model: Stripe is a payments platform that makes money by charging a per-transaction fee to businesses. The standard pricing is around 2.9% + $0.30 per successful card charge in the U.S. (with slight variations for volume or international cards)[3]. This pay-as-you-go model means no monthly fee for basic services – Stripe’s revenue scales with the user’s transaction volume.

· Tiered & Enterprise Pricing: In addition to the default rate, Stripe offers custom enterprise pricing and volume discounts for high-processing businesses. It has also added premium products (fraud prevention, billing, etc.) that may have their own fees. The core strategy, however, remains charging per usage, aligning cost with the business’s growth.

· No Subscription Required: Stripe’s pricing innovation was removing traditional setup or subscription fees in favor of pure usage fees – a model that lowered friction for startups to adopt payment processing. This approach was inspired by developer-friendly infrastructure: you only pay when you get paid.

· Target Segment: Stripe initially targeted startups and SMBs with its simple pricing and easy integration. Over time it moved upmarket, now serving large enterprise clients with negotiated rates for massive volume. Its transparent pricing appeals across segments, but it especially empowered small online businesses to start accepting payments without upfront costs.

Coinbase

· Commission-Based with Premium Options: Coinbase is a cryptocurrency exchange that historically charged transaction fees on trades (e.g. a percentage of trade value or spread). Retail users on the standard platform pay a fee for each buy/sell. Advanced traders had Coinbase Pro with a tiered maker-taker fee schedule. This usage-based fee model made up the bulk of Coinbase’s revenue.

· Pricing Pivot – Subscription (Coinbase One): In 2021, Coinbase introduced Coinbase One, a subscription that offers zero trading fees up to a limit and other perks. By 2024, Coinbase had expanded this into a tiered subscription program. The core Coinbase One plan costs around $29.99/month and provides zero-fee trades (with certain limits), higher staking rewards, and account protections[4]. There’s even a Premium tier (~$299/month) with unlimited zero-fee trading and concierge support for power users[4].

· Multiple Revenue Streams: Beyond trading fees and subscriptions, Coinbase earns from spreads on crypto conversions, withdrawal fees, and institutional custody fees. The introduction of subscriptions is a notable innovation aimed at smoothing revenue and catering to frequent traders.

· Target Segment: Coinbase’s pricing strategies cover both retail consumers (easy but higher-fee buys for casual investors, or a $5–$30/month subscription for enthusiasts) and institutional/enterprise clients (with custom pricing for prime brokerage and large trades). The Coinbase One subscription specifically targets high-volume retail traders who can save on fees by paying a flat monthly rate.

Instacart

· Hybrid Usage & Membership Model: Instacart is a grocery delivery marketplace that uses a combination of per-order fees and an optional subscription. Customers generally pay a delivery fee (often $3.99+ per order) and a service fee (~5% of the basket) on each order. There are also small cart fees for orders below a minimum. This pay-per-order pricing is classic usage-based revenue.

· Instacart+ (formerly Instacart Express): For frequent users, Instacart offers a subscription membership. Priced at $9.99 per month or $99 per year, Instacart+ gives unlimited free deliveries on orders above a store minimum, plus reduced service fees[5]. This tiered approach (free vs paid membership) is a classic freemium upsell – casual users pay per order, power users subscribe to save money.

· Pricing Evolution: Early on, Instacart sometimes marked up grocery item prices from the store as an indirect fee. Over time they shifted to more transparent pricing where many retailers’ in-app prices match in-store, relying on explicit fees and memberships for revenue. Instacart+ itself has evolved (recently rebranded and adding family sharing benefits) to improve retention.

· Target Segment: The per-order fees target occasional consumers who use Instacart for convenience, while the Instacart+ subscription targets households and high-frequency customers (often busy professionals or families) who will pay for value over many orders. Instacart also monetizes the retail partners (grocery stores) via commissions on sales and advertising placements, making its pricing a balance between consumer fees and retailer fees.

DoorDash

· Delivery Fees & Commissions: DoorDash, like other food delivery apps, charges consumers per order and also takes a commission from restaurants. A typical consumer order might include a delivery fee (varies by distance/demand), a service fee (~10% of order), and optional tip. Meanwhile, restaurants pay DoorDash a commission (often around 15%–30% of the order value) for the delivery service and customer acquisition. This dual-sided fee model drives revenue from both sides of the marketplace.

· DashPass Membership: DoorDash introduced DashPass, a subscription for frequent users. Priced at $9.99 monthly (or ~$96 annually), DashPass offers $0 delivery fees and reduced service fees on orders from partner restaurants over a minimum amount[6]. This subscription encourages loyalty and higher order frequency, and has been a key innovation in food delivery pricing.

· Promotions & Dynamic Fees: DoorDash employs dynamic pricing elements – for example, higher delivery fees during peak times or “Busy Pricing.” They also offer promotions like free delivery on certain offers (often subsidized to spur demand). The introduction of DashPass and strategic fee waivers reflect how DoorDash adjusts pricing to balance volume and margins.

· Target Segment: DoorDash’s pricing is aimed at consumers across the board, but the DashPass specifically targets power users (often urban customers who order food multiple times a week). Its commission structure and optional marketing fees target restaurants and SMBs, with custom arrangements for large enterprise restaurant chains. Essentially, casual users can pay per use, whereas super-users and business partners engage via subscription or negotiated rates.

· Ad-Supported Freemium Model: Reddit is primarily a free platform for users, monetized through advertising. Anyone can browse and post for free. Revenue comes from promoted posts and banner ads shown to users, making it a classic ad-supported consumer platform.

· Reddit Premium (Subscription): Reddit also offers an optional subscription called Reddit Premium (formerly Reddit Gold). For about $5.99 per month[7], Premium users get an ad-free browsing experience, custom app icons, and other perks. (Previously, Premium gave monthly allocations of “Coins” to award posts, but Reddit discontinued its coins/awards system in 2023 to simplify the platform[8][9].)

· Pricing Changes: A notable pivot was Reddit’s decision to sunset the Gold/Coin microtransaction system[8]. For years users could buy virtual coins to tip content (a form of user-to-user rewarding that also generated revenue). In mid-2023, Reddit removed this system to streamline incentives, effectively doubling down on ads and Premium subscriptions for revenue. The Premium price itself has remained modest (increased from $3.99 to $5.99 over time[10]).

· Target Segment: Reddit’s free usage targets mass consumer audiences (its millions of community members), relying on scale for ad revenue. Reddit Premium, by contrast, targets the enthusiast users – those who use Reddit heavily and will pay for a better experience (no ads, etc.). This small paying segment subsidizes the platform alongside advertisers. Enterprises don’t figure into Reddit’s pricing directly, though third-party developers faced new API fees in 2023 (another pricing-related shift, but affecting app developers rather than end-users).

Dropbox

· Freemium Cloud Storage: Dropbox’s initial growth came from a classic freemium model[11]. Every user gets a basic amount of storage free, and individuals pay for more. For example, Dropbox offers a free tier (initially 2 GB, now more with referrals), and then paid plans like Plus or Family for additional capacity and features. This model successfully converted a fraction of free users to paid, fueling growth.

· Subscription Tiers: Today, Dropbox’s core offering is subscription-based. Consumers can subscribe to tiers (Plus, Family, Professional) on a monthly or annual fee for set storage limits and premium features. Teams and businesses have higher-tier plans (Standard, Advanced, Enterprise) on a per-user per-month pricing. This reflects a shift from just individual freemium to a broad tiered SaaS approach, including heavy emphasis on business subscriptions.

· Enterprise Pivot: A notable strategic pivot for Dropbox was expanding from a consumer tool to an enterprise solution[11]. Around mid-2010s, facing competition and slow consumer growth, Dropbox launched Dropbox for Business/Enterprise, adding admin controls, security, and team collaboration features. Pricing moved from simply storage size-based to per-seat licensing for business customers. This allowed Dropbox to monetize organizations with many users, not just individuals. By focusing on enterprise clients (with higher willingness to pay for collaboration and security), Dropbox achieved greater revenue sustainability.

· Target Segment: Initially targeted at individual consumers (simplifying file sync for anyone, with viral referral incentives), Dropbox now heavily targets SMBs and enterprises alongside prosumers. The freemium/free tier still draws in individuals, but the big revenue comes from teams in companies paying per user. Thus its pricing spans from single users (B2C) to large companies (B2B), with the model shifting toward the latter in recent years[11].

Twitch (Justin.tv)

· Free Content with Optional Subscriptions: Twitch is a live-streaming platform (born from Justin.tv) that is free for viewers to watch. Its monetization is twofold: advertising (ads run during streams) and viewer subscriptions/donations. Viewers can buy a subscription to a streamer’s channel (commonly \$4.99/month for Tier 1) to support that creator and get perks. Twitch shares this revenue with creators.

· Revenue Split Model: Twitch’s standard model is a 50/50 revenue split on subscriptions with streamers[12]. For example, on a \$5 subscription, Twitch keeps about \$2.50 and the streamer gets \$2.50 (before local taxes). In the past, top streamers had premium contracts for a 70/30 split, but Twitch announced in 2022 that it would phase out special 70% deals and enforce the 50% standard split beyond certain earnings thresholds (citing costs of service)[13]. This caused controversy but underscored Twitch’s need to align pricing uniformly.

· Other Pricing/Monetization Mechanisms: Viewers can also purchase Bits (virtual currency) to cheer in chat; Twitch typically takes ~30% of the money spent on Bits. Additionally, Twitch Turbo is a paid $8.99/mo plan for viewers to get site-wide ad-free viewing (a subscription on the viewer side not tied to a specific streamer). These are all voluntary or value-added purchases on top of the free content.

· Target Segment: Twitch’s pricing approach targets consumers (viewers) for voluntary spend – essentially a freemium content model where most enjoy for free and a subset pay to subscribe or buy Bits to support creators. It also heavily serves the creator community (streamers) by providing them monetization tools; however, streamers “pay” by giving Twitch a cut of their earnings rather than an upfront fee. The model is designed around a three-way value split between the platform, creators, and fans.

Cruise

· Ride-Hailing Usage Fees: Cruise (GM’s autonomous vehicle startup, YC W14) generates revenue by charging fares for robotaxi rides. Its pricing is usage-based per ride, much like Uber or taxis. In San Francisco, for instance, Cruise has charged a base fare (around $5) plus a per-minute and per-mile fee[14]. One reported structure is $5 base + \$0.90 per mile + \$0.40 per minute of ride time[14], plus any applicable taxes. This makes Cruise rides comparable in price to human ride-hailing, though rates can evolve.

· Promotional Periods: During early launch phases, Cruise often offered free or flat-rate rides in limited areas to attract trial users while testing. As they expand, they are transitioning to normal fare collection. They’ve also done things like flat \$5 rides for early users in new cities[15] as a promotion.

· No Subscription (Yet): Currently, Cruise’s model is purely pay-per-ride; there isn’t a monthly pass or subscription for unlimited rides (unlike some public transit). However, as robotaxis scale, Cruise or competitors could experiment with subscription plans for commuters. For now, the focus is on competitive per-ride pricing to build habit and undercut the cost of owning a car or using ride-share with a human driver.

· Target Segment: Cruise targets consumers in urban areas who need transportation, directly competing with services like Uber/Lyft and traditional taxis. The pricing structure (base + time/distance) is familiar to these users. In the long run, Cruise’s market could include commuters, city residents without cars, and late-night riders – basically anyone using ride-hailing. They may also pursue partnerships with businesses (e.g. offering rides to corporate campus employees or delivery logistics), but the core pricing is B2C for passenger rides.

Brex

· Fintech Interchange Model with SaaS: Brex provides corporate cards and a spend management platform for businesses. Its primary revenue initially comes from interchange fees on card transactions (the small percentage that merchants pay networks). Because Brex makes money whenever a user swipes their Brex card, it was able to offer the software and cards with no upfront cost or annual fee to startups. This interchange-driven model allowed Brex to undercut traditional banks on fees.

· Introduction of SaaS Pricing: As Brex’s product suite grew (expense management software, travel booking, etc.), it introduced a SaaS element. Brex now has a premium software plan (e.g. ~$12–$15 per user per month) for advanced budgeting and compliance features[16]. However, Brex prices this software notably lower than stand-alone competitors because interchange subsidizes it. In fact, Brex’s strategy is explicitly to monetize via interchange so they can charge far less for software than pure-play SaaS firms[17].

· Freemium for Startups: Brex effectively uses a freemium/low-cost approach – basic card and expense features were free to use for most, with the Brex Premium tier as an upsell. Even the premium plan can be waived or discounted depending on the customer’s card spend. This was a pricing innovation in the corporate card space (where traditionally companies paid bank fees or didn’t get software tools).

· Target Segment: Brex’s pricing is tailored to startups and SMBs (initially tech startups in YC and beyond). By removing fees and offering rewards, it attracted young companies who couldn’t get corporate cards from traditional banks. As Brex moves upmarket, it targets larger enterprises with more advanced paid features, but it still positions itself as a cost-effective solution versus legacy corporate card programs. The combination of financial product + SaaS means its pricing must appeal to finance teams (who compare software costs) as well as benefit from employees’ card usage.

Gusto

· Subscription + Per-Employee Model: Gusto (formerly ZenPayroll) offers payroll and HR software for small businesses on a subscription model. Its pricing is typically a monthly base fee plus a charge per employee. For example, Gusto’s core plan might start around $40–$50 per month base + \$6 per employee per month for payroll[18]. Higher tiers with more HR features have higher base and per-employee fees (e.g. the Premium plan might be $149 base + $12/employee).

· Tiered Plans for SMBs: Gusto has tiered plans (Basic, Core, Complete, Concierge, etc.), scaling from just payroll up to full HR support. Each tier builds in more features (benefits administration, HR advisory, etc.) at a higher monthly price. This tiered SaaS pricing aligns with the size and needs of the business. All tiers maintain the per-person component, which scales Gusto’s revenue as the client grows.

· Ancillary Revenue: Gusto also makes some money via partner commissions (for health insurance or retirement plans it brokers) rather than charging the employer directly, effectively embedding some costs in the products it resells. But its core pricing innovation was simplifying payroll pricing (no nickel-and-dime for each pay run, just an all-inclusive monthly fee). It also for a time offered a freemium trial or free contractor-only accounts, to hook very small businesses.

· Target Segment: Gusto squarely targets SMBs (small and mid-sized businesses) – companies that find traditional payroll providers like ADP too complex or costly. Its pricing is transparent and relatively low, appealing to businesses with limited budgets. The per-employee model makes it affordable for a 5-person startup (maybe ~$70/month) while still allowing Gusto to earn more if a client scales to 50 or 100 employees[18]. Larger companies (hundreds of employees) might outgrow Gusto and move to enterprise solutions, but Gusto’s Concierge tier does try to serve the higher end of small business with more hand-holding (at a higher price).

Zapier

· Freemium + Tiered Subscription: Zapier, an automation tool, uses a freemium model with usage-based limits. The Free plan allows a small number of “Zaps” (automation workflows) and tasks per month. To unlock more, users must upgrade to paid plans. The paid plans are tiered (Starter, Professional, Team, Company), each with a higher monthly task quota and features. For example, the Professional plan starts around $29.99/month and higher tiers go into the hundreds per month for teams[19].

· Usage-Based Scaling: Within each plan, Zapier essentially charges by usage – the more tasks you run, the higher plan you need. If a user hits their task limit, they either wait for it to reset next month or upgrade. This consumption-based element ensures heavy users pay more. Zapier also distinguishes plans by features like multi-step Zaps, priority support, and team collaboration, adding a classic feature tiering on top of usage limits.

· Notable Pivots: Zapier’s core pricing approach (free + tiers by usage) has remained steady, but it has adjusted specifics (like how many tasks in free vs. paid, introducing an “Automation Interfaces” feature now included at all plan levels to add value). It hasn’t notably slashed prices; instead it has focused on expanding integrations and value at each price point. One could say Zapier’s “innovation” was proving that a horizontal B2B tool could succeed with a self-serve freemium funnel – at its scale, many similar SaaS tools for businesses opt for sales-led pricing, but Zapier kept a low-cost self-service ethos** even as it grew.

· Target Segment: Zapier’s pricing is designed to serve individual professionals and small teams at the low end (those who might pay $20–$50/month to save time on integrations) and larger teams or departments at the high end (companies that might pay hundreds or more for lots of automations). The Free tier targets hobbyists and as a lead-in for prosumers. Enterprises can use Zapier too, though very large-scale integration needs might push them to seek custom plans or move to iPaaS providers; Zapier’s sweet spot is really the SMB and “long tail” of business users who want automation without enterprise IT overhead.

OpenSea

· Transaction Fee Marketplace: OpenSea, the largest NFT marketplace, makes money by taking a commission on each sale. By default, OpenSea has charged a 2.5% fee on the sale price of every NFT sold on its platform[20]. This is a classic marketplace model similar to eBay or stock exchanges but applied to digital collectibles. There’s no listing fee (generally), only a fee when an item sells.

· Royalties and Fee Changes: For a while, NFT creators could set their own royalty (often 5–10%) that OpenSea would also charge the buyer and later pass to creators. OpenSea enforced these creator fees, which made total fees higher (e.g. 2.5% OpenSea + creator’s 5–10%). However, facing competition in 2023, OpenSea made a pivotal change: it temporarily dropped its 2.5% marketplace fee to 0% and made creator royalties optional[20]. This aggressive pricing move was to retain market share against rivals offering fee-free trading. As of late 2023, OpenSea’s fee was reintroduced (though it has experimented with lower fees and promotional zero-fee periods).

· No Subscription Model: OpenSea doesn’t charge users any membership or monthly cost – casual collectors and power traders alike pay the same per-transaction percentage. This aligns with blockchain ethos where users don’t expect to pay until a transaction occurs. OpenSea’s revenue thus scales with transaction volume (which can be volatile).

· Target Segment: The pricing model targets NFT buyers and sellers (consumers and creators) directly. It’s simple: if you transact, a cut goes to OpenSea. The 0% fee experiment aimed to attract back the most price-sensitive, high-volume traders who had started using competing platforms that had zero or even negative fees. In general, casual collectors might not notice a 2.5% fee, but big traders do – OpenSea’s pricing adjustments show it’s trying to serve both the general crypto collector audience and the professional NFT traders, by balancing platform take rate with market share concerns.

Deel

· Per-Worker SaaS Pricing: Deel provides global payroll, compliance, and Employer-of-Record services. Its pricing is primarily subscription per worker: companies pay a fixed monthly fee for each contractor or employee managed through Deel. For example, hiring a contractor via Deel starts at $49 per contractor per month[21]. Hiring a full-time employee through Deel’s EOR service can cost around \$500–$600 per employee per month (since Deel becomes the legal employer)[22]. These fees are flat and predictable, covering the software platform and the service of compliance.

· Tiered Offerings: Deel offers different plans or products (Contractor Management vs. Full-Time EOR vs. Global Payroll for entities). Each has its own price point – e.g., a cheaper rate for just paying international contractors, and a premium rate for fully outsourcing HR as an Employer of Record. According to one guide, Deel’s plans range from $29 up to $599 per person per month depending on service scope[22]. This indicates a broad tiering from simple software (lower price) to heavy full-service HR (high price).

· Volume and Value Considerations: Deel’s notable innovation was packaging what traditionally might require multiple vendors or legal setups into a per-worker cost. Rather than charging significant setup fees per country, Deel mostly kept pricing to monthly per worker, making it scalable and transparent. They also tout not having hidden fees – exchange rates and other costs are passed through at market rates. Over time, Deel expanded features (like Deel HR basic tools for free) to add value at the same price, effectively increasing stickiness rather than cutting prices.

· Target Segment: Deel’s pricing targets businesses hiring across borders – initially startups and SMBs who suddenly needed to pay international team members. $49 per contractor is positioned as affordable compared to opening a foreign entity or using expensive outsourcing firms. As Deel grew (now a large unicorn), it also serves mid-market and enterprise clients, who might put thousands of workers on the platform (leading to multi-million ARR contracts). But the modular per-employee pricing remains, appealing to companies of all sizes for its clarity. In short, it’s B2B SaaS with a focus on HR/payroll departments as buyers.

Rippling

· Modular Per-Employee Pricing: Rippling is an all-in-one platform for HR, IT, and finance operations. Its pricing is primarily per employee per month for each module a customer uses. For instance, Rippling’s core HR package has been cited starting at $8 per user per month[23]. Additional modules (Payroll, IT device management, Benefits, etc.) each add costs. Payroll might add a base fee (e.g. $35) plus a per-person fee. Overall, a fully loaded Rippling customer could be paying $20-$30+ per employee/month if they use many modules[24].

· Unified Bundle vs. À la carte: Rippling’s innovation is selling an integrated bundle – clients can start with one piece (say HRIS) and easily add others (like IT management for an extra few dollars per user). This land-and-expand pricing means initial entry can be low cost (just one module per user), and then average revenue per user grows as the client adopts more modules. Rippling publishes some starting prices, but for a lot of functionality they encourage getting a quote, implying some customization or volume pricing for larger accounts.

· Notable Pivots: Rippling hasn’t dramatically changed its model since launch – it’s consistently pushed the message “all your systems in one, billed per employee.” However, one pivot was launching an Employer-of-Record service (similar to Deel) for international hiring, priced around $500/employee (market standard). This indicates Rippling is willing to bolt on high-value services with different pricing while keeping its core modular SaaS pricing intact.

· Target Segment: Rippling’s pricing is aimed at small-to-mid size companies that are scaling (perhaps 10 to a few hundred employees). These customers appreciate per-user pricing that grows with them and the convenience of one platform. The simplicity of “\$X per employee for each function” is attractive to startups and mid-market firms. Rippling does serve larger companies too, but enterprises might negotiate custom pricing. In general it competes by being cost-competitive with buying several point solutions separately (e.g., separate HR, payroll, IT systems) – a bundle incentive.

Flexport

· Transaction/Service-Based Pricing: Flexport is a freight forwarder and logistics platform, so its “pricing” is not a simple SaaS fee. It primarily earns revenue through transactional services in global trade – essentially, it charges shippers for arranging freight transportation. Pricing might include freight rates plus a markup or service fee. In practice, Flexport gives businesses quotes for shipments (covering ocean/air freight costs, customs brokerage, insurance, etc.), and its margin is embedded in those costs. This functions like a usage-based model: the more containers a client ships, the more Flexport earns.

· Digital Platform Free Access: Flexport differentiates by offering a modern software dashboard for free to its customers. The software platform is bundled with the service at no additional charge. Instead of charging a subscription for its logistics software, Flexport includes it as a value-add to win shipping volume. This is innovative in an industry where incumbents charged manual service fees – Flexport’s software drives stickiness and efficiency, but the customer effectively pays via the freight service charges, not a SaaS bill.

· Expanded Services: Flexport has expanded into offering supply chain financing, customs compliance, and purchase order management. Pricing for these may be case-by-case (e.g., financing has interest rates, customs services might be flat fees per filing). There isn’t a single price sheet publicly, as logistics is complex. However, Flexport’s promise was price transparency – providing up-front all-in quotes and reducing surprise fees common in freight. Their platform allows clients to see exactly what they’re paying for (fuel surcharges, etc.), which is a value innovation even if the nominal pricing model (take a cut of shipping) is traditional.

· Target Segment: Flexport primarily targets importers/exporters and businesses with global supply chains – this ranges from mid-sized e-commerce retailers up to large enterprises moving thousands of containers. The pricing model is adaptable: SMBs can use Flexport without any subscription, just paying per shipment which scales with their growth, while larger enterprises might negotiate rate agreements for high volumes. By not charging for the software separately, Flexport made it easier for companies of all sizes to adopt its platform and shift their freight spend onto it.

GitLab

· Open-Core Subscription Model: GitLab is a DevOps platform that started as open-source. Its pricing follows an open-core SaaS model with a free tier and paid tiers for more features. The core GitLab product is free for self-hosted users (Community Edition) and there is a free tier for the SaaS version as well. Paid plans (Premium, Ultimate) are sold as per-user subscriptions (per month or per year) for additional proprietary features and support.

· Tiered Plans – Premium/Ultimate: GitLab’s tiers are quite steep in price as they target business users. Premium is roughly \$19 per user/month, and Ultimate about \$99 per user/month (these were increased in 2022–2023). Each tier unlocks more capabilities (e.g., Ultimate includes security scanning, portfolio management, etc.). This feature-based tiering lets small teams use basic features free or cheaply, while larger enterprises pay for advanced functionality. Notably, the free tier has been critical to GitLab’s growth, seeding adoption in the developer community.

· Pricing Pivot: Over time, GitLab has adjusted its pricing strategy by raising prices and consolidating features into higher tiers. For example, in 2023 GitLab announced a significant price increase for its Premium tier, coupled with moving some Ultimate features down into Premium to add value. This signaled a focus on driving more users to higher paid tiers and increasing ARPU, after years of rapid user growth. GitLab also offers discounts to educational institutions and open-source projects to maintain goodwill and market share among developers.

· Target Segment: GitLab’s pricing caters to a broad range: individual developers and open-source teams can use it free, ensuring widespread adoption. SMBs and mid-size companies often opt for Premium for support and essential features, while large enterprises with mission-critical needs go for Ultimate (with features like compliance controls, priority support). The per-user pricing aligns with how companies scale their dev teams. GitLab being an all-in-one tool can replace multiple point solutions, so enterprises often justify its cost by consolidation. The net result is a strategy that hooks users for free and converts organizations into paying customers as they grow or require advanced capabilities.

Segment

· Usage-Based Pricing (MTUs): Segment (a customer data platform) charges customers primarily on a usage-based model, measured by MTUs (Monthly Tracked Users) or events processed. Essentially, the more user data you route through Segment, the higher the cost. Segment historically had a free tier (for up to a certain number of data sources or events) and then paid plans that scale with usage. For larger volumes, Segment’s contracts can range widely – estimates put mid-size contracts in the tens of thousands per year, up to enterprise deals over $100k, depending on data volume[25].

· Enterprise Tiering: While usage is the core, Segment also tiered its offerings by features and support. E.g., the Team/Business tier might provide core connections and a certain MTU allotment, while the Enterprise tier offers higher SLAs, unlimited connections, and advanced protocols at a custom price. In practice, many Segment customers end up on annual contracts sized to their anticipated event volume (often negotiated). Segment’s pricing approach is often cited as an example of hybrid volume-tiered pricing – you commit to a volume and pay more as you exceed thresholds.

· Pricing Pivot – Twilio Acquisition: Segment was acquired by Twilio in 2020. Since then, some pricing integration has happened (Twilio’s pay-as-you-go ethos). However, Segment still generally requires speaking to sales for larger plans, meaning it’s not fully self-serve at scale. One could say Segment’s early pricing innovation was offering a free developer plan, which helped it spread among startups, then monetizing usage as those startups grew – a land-and-expand via developers.

· Target Segment: Segment’s name is apt; it initially targeted software developers and product teams at startups (who would implement it for free or cheap), then grew into serving marketing and data teams at mid-to-large enterprises who can afford its sizable bills. The usage pricing means even a large enterprise can start small (with a limited data integration need) and expand usage over time. However, enterprises will typically budget for it at scale. Competing CDP solutions often had flat enterprise license fees, so Segment’s usage model was a differentiator to win smaller customers and then scale into big ones.

Checkr

· Per-Report (Transactional) Pricing: Checkr, a background check platform, mostly uses a usage-based pricing model, charging clients per background check run. It offers packaged checks (Basic, Essential, Complete, etc.) at set unit prices. For example, a standard criminal background check might cost around $29.99 for a Basic report, $54.99 for an Essential, up to ~$89.99 for a Complete report[26]. Each tier of report includes deeper searches (like Basic plus education and employment verification in higher tiers) and thus costs more.

· Volume Discounts: For companies that run a high volume of checks (hundreds per year), Checkr provides custom pricing or enterprise plans. On their site, they differentiate “under 300 checks per year” (pay-as-you-go online) vs. “over 300” (sales-team engagement for volume pricing)[26]. This indicates a threshold where it switches from list prices to negotiated lower rates. So, a small business might just pay list price per report as needed, whereas a gig-economy company hiring thousands of drivers will get a discounted rate.

· Ancillary Fees: Some costs in background checks are external (like county court fees, motor vehicle records fees). Checkr passes those through at cost (often adding them on top of the base package price). So a “$29.99” basic check could end up slightly more if a certain jurisdiction charges a fee. Checkr is transparent about these passthrough fees so clients understand any extra charges[27].

· Target Segment: Checkr’s pricing serves businesses that need to screen employees or contractors. That ranges from startups (who might run a few checks a year, happy with on-demand pricing) to enterprise gig platforms like Uber, Instacart (running millions of checks). The self-serve per-report pricing is attractive to SMBs and mid-market HR teams: no subscription required, just pay per use. The high-volume pricing makes it viable for large enterprises to integrate Checkr at scale. In all cases, the cost is usually borne by the employer (sometimes passed to the candidate as part of an application process, but typically an HR cost), and Checkr’s model aligns with hiring volume.

Rappi

· Delivery Fees and Commissions: Rappi is a Latin American “super-app” known for on-demand delivery (food, groceries, and more). Its model mirrors other delivery platforms: consumers pay per order fees, and vendors pay commissions. A user placing an order might pay a delivery fee (varies by distance/promotion) and sometimes a small service fee. Meanwhile, restaurants or stores give Rappi a percentage cut (often around 10–20% of order value) as commission for facilitating the sale. These fees can vary by category – grocery stores, for example, might have different arrangements than restaurants.

· Rappi Prime Subscription: Emulating peers, Rappi has a subscription called Rappi Prime (or Rappi Pro). For a monthly fee (around $5–$7 USD equivalent, varies by country), users get unlimited free deliveries above certain order values[28]. For instance, in Colombia Rappi Prime Plus was about 24,900 COP (~$5.50) per month for unlimited deliveries[28]. This subscription helps retain frequent users and increase order frequency, similar to Instacart+ or DoorDash DashPass.

· Service Expansion and Bundling: Rappi’s innovation is offering many verticals (food, groceries, pharmacy, courier, even banking services) in one app. It has at times bundled Prime with other services (e.g., partnering with Amazon Prime or offering other perks). The Prime membership is a key pivot that Rappi pushed to drive loyalty in a competitive market where users might hop between apps for promos.

· Target Segment: Rappi targets the urban consumer market in Latin America – people willing to pay a bit extra for convenience. Its pricing strategy tries to accommodate both one-time casual users (who will pay a delivery fee occasionally) and power users (young professionals, families in big cities who might use Rappi daily and thus opt for Prime to save money). On the partner side, Rappi’s commissions and marketing fees target businesses (restaurants, retailers) who want access to Rappi’s customer base. Rappi has to balance taking a sustainable commission with keeping merchants on board (a challenge as restaurants often complain about high delivery app commissions).

Razorpay

· Payment Gateway Transaction Fees: Razorpay is an Indian fintech that provides online payment gateway services (akin to Stripe for India). Its primary pricing model is usage-based per transaction fees. Razorpay’s standard rate is roughly 2% (for domestic cards/UPI/netbanking) and around 3%–3.5% for international cards[29], plus a small fixed amount in some cases. These fees are charged to the business on each transaction processed. Razorpay markets its pricing as “no setup fee, no monthly fee, pay per use”, which is attractive to startups and small merchants coming online[29].

· Enterprise Plans: For large merchants, Razorpay offers a custom Enterprise plan[30]. High-volume businesses can negotiate lower rates or get value-added services bundled (such as a dedicated account manager, faster settlements, etc.). The enterprise plan pricing is not public, but effectively it’s a volume-discount model on the basic fees.

· Adjacent Products: Razorpay has expanded into adjacent fintech offerings (like Razorpay X for business banking, lending, payroll). Some of these have their own pricing (for example, Razorpay X banking might have flat fees for payouts or issuance). But the core gateway pricing has remained relatively straightforward and transparent, which was an innovation in a market where banks often had opaque pricing. Razorpay also launched a zero MDR (fee) UPI payment option when mandated, making up revenue via other means in those cases.

· Target Segment: The pricing is designed to onboard Indian SMEs, startups, and online businesses quickly. A small merchant can start with no upfront cost and just lose ~2% of each sale – similar to global norms but localized. By providing an enterprise plan, Razorpay also serves large e-commerce and billers that process huge volumes. Essentially, from a college student project to a top e-commerce site, the model scales: small players pay per transaction at standard rates, big players get volume deals. The simplicity of pricing was key to Razorpay’s popularity among the tens of thousands of SMBs coming online during India’s digital boom[31].

Meesho

· Zero-Commission Marketplace Model: Meesho is an Indian e-commerce platform focused on social selling and unbranded goods at ultra-competitive prices. A defining feature of Meesho’s pricing strategy is that it adopted a 0% commission model for sellers on its platform[32]. Unlike traditional marketplaces that charge sellers a percentage fee on each sale, Meesho for a time removed commissions entirely to attract millions of small sellers. This was a bold innovation that dramatically lowered the barrier for small businesses to come online[32].

· Monetization via Other Means: With zero commissions, Meesho has had to monetize in alternate ways. It generates revenue through ads and value-added services. Sellers on Meesho can pay for advertising/promotion to boost their listings (a model similar to how Facebook Marketplace or Shopee monetized). Also, Meesho likely earns from logistics facilitation (perhaps taking a margin on the shipping costs it arranges). Essentially, it’s shifting from a commission-based revenue to an advertising-driven revenue model, at least in the growth phase.

· Pricing Target (Consumers): For shoppers, Meesho’s whole model is low prices. It built its brand on offering goods at rock-bottom rates, often via a network of resellers. There’s no membership fee for customers; discounts and free delivery are used liberally to drive growth. Meesho’s strategy of not taking a cut from sellers was intended to ensure the item prices remain as low as possible, thus targeting price-sensitive consumers in India’s tier-2 and tier-3 cities.

· Target Segment: Meesho’s pricing approach (zero commission) targets long-tail micro-sellers and home entrepreneurs – people who might not have joined an e-commerce platform if it ate into their slim margins. By being “seller-friendly” in cost, Meesho rapidly onboarded a huge seller base (over 15 million entrepreneurs). On the consumer side, the target is value-conscious shoppers who don’t mind unbranded goods. Meesho essentially subsidized the marketplace in the short term (forgoing commissions) to build network scale, betting it can monetize later via scale (ads, financial services, etc.). It’s a high-growth, low-take rate strategy distinct from say, Amazon or Flipkart in India.

Heroku

· Freemium Cloud Hosting: Heroku, a cloud platform-as-a-service, used a freemium model. It offers free allocation of resources (“free dynos” for running apps) to let developers host small apps at no cost. Beyond the free tier, Heroku charges on a usage-based subscription model: developers pay for dyno instances, add-on services (databases, caches), etc., on a monthly/hourly rate. Essentially, you scale up resources and pay for what you use – a small hobby app might fit on a free or $7/month dyno, a production app might use many dynos at hundreds of dollars.

· Pricing Units – Dynos & Add-ons: Heroku’s pricing innovation was the simplicity: a standard web dyno (container) cost a fixed amount per month (e.g. $25 for Standard-1X dyno), making it easy to predict costs. They also have “dyno hours” for finer granularity. Add-ons like a PostgreSQL database had tiers (from free up to enterprise-grade with higher monthly fees). This transparent, service-tiered pricing was attractive to developers compared to complex AWS pricing.

· Pivot – Eliminating Free Tier: A big change came in 2022 when Salesforce (Heroku’s owner) announced the end of the free tier for Heroku dynos and databases[33]. Citing abuse and fraud, Heroku removed free plans effective November 2022, meaning users have to move to paid plans (the lowest Hobby dyno is about $7/month)[33]. This marked a shift from pure freemium to essentially a trial-only model – you could still try Heroku free for a limited time, but long-term free hobby projects were no more. They later introduced a low-cost “Eco” dyno tier at ~$5/month as a replacement for hobbyists. This pivot was notable as it ended an era where countless developers ran free Heroku apps; the company refocused on paying customers.

· Target Segment: Heroku’s pricing and platform targeted developers and startups who valued convenience over raw cost. The free tier was key to attracting early-stage projects, prototypes, and students (increasing Heroku’s mindshare). The paid tiers serve SMB web apps and even mid-size enterprise apps that prefer Heroku’s managed approach vs. managing AWS infrastructure. By removing the free tier, Heroku signaled a shift to prioritizing professional and business users who will pay, rather than purely hobbyists. However, its developer-friendly pricing model (clear tiered resources) remains a selling point for those willing to pay for ease of use.

Amplitude

· Freemium and Subscription Tiers: Amplitude, a product analytics platform, uses a tiered subscription model with a free tier to start. The Free plan allows a certain number of user events per month (Amplitude historically offered a generous free tier, such as 10 million events/month for startups via promotions). Beyond free, Amplitude has paid plans like Growth and Enterprise. These are priced by a combination of features and usage – typically charging based on the number of tracked users/events and the suite of products (analytics, experimentation, etc.) included.

· Usage-Based Scaling: Amplitude’s pricing scales with consumption (events, data volume). If a customer’s product usage grows (more active users generating more events), they move into higher pricing tiers or add-ons. In practice, Amplitude often sells annual contracts sized by anticipated event volume. Publicly, exact prices aren’t listed (the website encourages contacting sales for Growth/Enterprise), but companies have reported spend in the six to seven figures annually for Amplitude at scale. For smaller customers, Amplitude introduced lower-cost packages and even a Startup Scholarship (one year free for qualifying startups)[34][35], reflecting a willingness to invest in early-stage adoption.

· Product Bundle Expansion: Amplitude has added new products (Experiment A/B testing, Recommend, etc.). These can be bundled or sold separately, which adds complexity to pricing. A notable aspect is Amplitude’s focus on value-based pricing – it charges for the analytics based on data tracked, not per-seat, which for many customers is aligned to the value they get (lots of user engagement data means more value). They do not charge by “user seats” for the core product; any team member can be added to the tool without affecting price, which encourages widespread use within a client organization.

· Target Segment: Amplitude’s free plan targets startups and individual product managers/developers evaluating analytics. Its paid plans target product teams and growth/marketing teams in mid-size to large companies. Essentially, as soon as a company relies heavily on product data to drive decisions, they become a paying Amplitude customer. The model is especially attractive to digital product companies (e.g., SaaS, mobile apps) who can tie the cost to clear ROI in user retention or conversion improvements. By offering a free year to startups and discounts to certain cohorts[34][35], Amplitude invests in being the default choice that later grows into an enterprise contract when the startup scales.

Benchling

· Enterprise SaaS Licensing: Benchling is a cloud platform for life science R&D (notebook, LIMS, etc.). It forgoes public pricing for a high-touch enterprise sales model. Generally, Benchling sells annual licenses that include a certain number of seats and modules. Reports indicate a starting package around $20k per year for ~5 users in 2020, and often $30k+ for 15 users for a professional package[36]. From there, large enterprise deals can scale to six or seven figures depending on the number of scientists and scope of deployment. In essence, it’s a per-seat subscription, but at an enterprise software price point (hundreds to thousands of dollars per seat annually).

· Usage-Based Element: Benchling’s pricing is described as partly usage-based in aligning with customer success[37]. This likely means as a customer uses more of the platform (e.g., more data storage, more workflow volume), Benchling’s fees may increase (either by needing additional user licenses or modules). For instance, a big pharma company might start with one department and then roll Benchling out company-wide, each expansion stage increasing the contract value. Benchling’s own site notes different licensing options by company size, implying modular pricing and add-ons to fit startups vs. big enterprises[38].

· Free for Academics: Notably, Benchling has a strategy to seed usage in academia: it offers its core product free for academic researchers[39]. This is analogous to freemium, except for a different segment. The idea is that scientists in universities use it at no cost (building familiarity), and when those scientists move to industry, they’ll push their companies to purchase Benchling. This has been a clever “bottom-up” growth tactic, albeit the actual buyers are top-down (lab managers, IT directors in pharma).

· Target Segment: Benchling’s paying customers are biotech startups, pharma companies, and research labs in industry. The pricing (tens of thousands per year and up) clearly targets enterprise budgets – even a 10-person biotech lab with $30k/year is a serious B2B sale, not a casual SaaS swipe of a credit card. Thus, Benchling’s model is more akin to traditional enterprise software than to typical YC SaaS companies. They focus on high-value R&D organizations that can afford robust digital infrastructure for science. The academic free usage ensures future scientist end-users are already comfortable with the product by the time they work at these companies, helping justify the enterprise cost.

Lattice

· Per-Seat SaaS Subscription: Lattice is HR performance management software (for OKRs, reviews, engagement surveys, etc.). Its pricing is modular per user per month, billed annually. The core Performance Management module is about $11 per user/month (annual plan)[40]. Lattice also offers additional modules like Engagement (surveys), OKR/Goals, and Compensation tools, each with their own per-seat price (often in the single-digit dollars). Customers can choose the modules they need.

· Modular Tiering: Companies can start with one module (e.g., just Performance) or opt for the “full platform” bundle. For instance, Lattice’s website lists “Performance” at $11, “Engage” at a similar price, “Grow” (career development) at a smaller add-on fee, etc.[41]. If a customer buys multiple, the cost per user adds up (Performance + Engagement might be around $20/user/month combined). There’s also an Enterprise tier with custom pricing for larger organizations requiring more support or security features.

· Innovations: Lattice’s key innovation was bringing flexible, consumer-like pricing to HR software. Traditional HR suites sold as one large package; Lattice let companies pick à la carte. Over time, as Lattice added modules, its pricing has remained relatively transparent. They also provide volume-based discounts for large companies. Lattice’s model encourages starting with one module and upselling others, which has been a successful growth lever.

· Target Segment: Lattice primarily targets SMBs and mid-market companies looking to modernize their people management. Its pricing (tens of dollars per employee per year) is attractive to a 50-person or 500-person company that might find enterprise HR software too expensive or heavyweight. Larger enterprises also use Lattice, but may negotiate. The per-user model directly ties cost to company size, which HR departments expect. It means Lattice’s revenue grows as its clients grow headcount. The modular approach also means HR teams at smaller firms can justify a starting budget for one pain-point (e.g., performance reviews), then expand. Overall, Lattice’s pricing is a case of SaaS in HR: predictable, per employee, annually billed – aligned with how HR budgets and headcounts work.

Ginkgo Bioworks

· Hybrid Service & Royalty Model: Ginkgo Bioworks (a synthetic biology platform) uses a unique pricing model in biotech. It charges partners Foundry usage fees for performing organism engineering R&D, and also takes a “value share” (royalties/equity) in successful outcomes[42]. Essentially, Ginkgo’s revenue comes in two forms:

· Foundry Fees: Up-front payments from customers to design and test microbes/cells (this is like a contract research fee, often milestone-based).

· Royalties/Equity: Longer-term upside if the engineered organism is commercialized – Ginkgo might earn a royalty on product sales, milestones, or even equity in the partner’s company[42].

· Alignment of Incentives: This model was innovative for the biotech/CRO space. Traditional labs might just charge per experiment or FTE hour. Ginkgo instead pitches a lower base fee in exchange for sharing risk/reward. That way, if the program succeeds, Ginkgo participates in the upside (e.g., a percentage of revenue from a new drug or fragrance ingredient)[43]. If it fails, Ginkgo at least got paid for the work via the foundry fee. This success-linked pricing aligns Ginkgo’s incentives with its customers’ success.

· Platform Access Fees: For pure “Foundry-as-a-Service” deals, Ginkgo does sometimes operate on a more straightforward fee-for-service. The total market for these R&D services is large and Ginkgo’s price depends on the complexity of the program. They have indicated the foundry usage is a ~$40B addressable market[44], implying they price competitively against internal R&D costs. We can interpret that Ginkgo’s foundry fee might be structured as a monthly project fee or per deliverable milestone; details are often bespoke per contract.

· Target Segment: Ginkgo’s customers are companies in pharma, agriculture, chemicals, food, etc. that need biotech R&D but want to outsource it. The pricing model particularly attracts companies that may not afford the full cost of developing a biological product on their own, because Ginkgo’s value-share lowers the upfront cost. For large corporations, value-share can also be attractive to offload risk. In some cases, Ginkgo even partners to spin out new startups and takes equity – acting as both service provider and co-founder. This reflects a B2B partnership model more than a simple vendor-client transaction. Ginkgo’s pricing strategy is thus about creating long-term joint upside with clients, which is unusual and noteworthy in the YC portfolio (and in the biotech industry).

Scribd

· Subscription Model for Consumers: Scribd began as a document sharing site, but its pivotal shift was to a subscription service for digital reading. For a flat monthly fee (currently about $11.99/month in the US), subscribers get access to an unlimited library of ebooks, audiobooks, articles, and documents. This “all-you-can-read” model has been described as a Netflix-like or Spotify-like subscription for reading[45]. It entices users with a large content buffet for one price.

· Freemium Origins and Transition: Originally, Scribd let users upload documents and share them, with ad-supported or pay-per-download options. Around 2013, they launched the ebook subscription (initially $8.99/month)[46]. This was a major pivot in pricing and product. It transformed Scribd into a premium content provider rather than just a sharing platform. They still have free content (user-uploaded docs) but the premium catalog is the core offering now. Scribd also offers a short free trial to convert users to paying.

· Catalog and Cost Management: A challenge with this model is royalty payout to publishers. Scribd had to adjust its offering over time – for instance, at one point it limited the number of titles (especially certain genres like romance novels) a user could read per month to control costs. Eventually, they claimed to find a sustainable model with truly unlimited reading by managing publisher deals and recommendations. Their pricing has remained roughly ~$9–$12 range, showing they’re competing on affordability relative to buying individual books.

· Target Segment: Scribd’s subscription targets avid readers and learners who are willing to pay a modest fee for access to a wide range of content. At that price, even someone who reads one book and a couple of magazines a month gets value. They also market to students and professionals who might use the library of documents and research. By positioning as a broad content platform, Scribd goes for a mass-market consumer audience (similar to Kindle Unlimited, which is a competitor). The simplicity of one plan, one price, unlimited use is appealing to consumers, differentiating from old pay-per-book or rental models. It’s a B2C strategy through and through – publishers are partners supplying content, but the revenue model is entirely based on attracting and retaining paying subscribers.

Sources:

· YC Unicorns/Top Companies data and company info[47][48][49]

· Pricing model details from company blogs, help centers, and news coverage: Airbnb[1][2], Stripe[3], Coinbase[4], Instacart[5], DoorDash[6], Reddit[7][8], Dropbox[11], Twitch[12], Cruise[14], Brex[17], Gusto[18], Zapier[19], OpenSea[20], Deel[22], Rippling[23], Razorpay[29], Meesho[32], Heroku[33], Amplitude[34], Benchling[36], Lattice[40], Ginkgo Bioworks[42], Scribd[45].

[1] [2] Airbnb Host-Only 15.5% Fee Explained: What Hosts Need to Know - The Leading All-In-One Vacation rental management software for Pros - Hostaway

https://www.hostaway.com/blog/airbnb-host-only-fee-what-to-know-about-the-15-percent-host-fee/

[3] The BEST Ecommerce Platforms in 2026 & Why (FREE & Paid)

https://www.thesearchengineshop.com/best-ecommerce-platform/

[4] Coinbase Upgrades Subscription Program, Launches Premium Tier

https://www.pymnts.com/cryptocurrency/2024/coinbase-upgrades-subscription-program-and-launches-premium-tier/

[5] Instacart membership: What to know, fees, benefits and more

https://www.nbcnews.com/select/shopping/instacart-membership-rcna145633

[6] What is DashPass? - DoorDash Support

https://help.doordash.com/consumers/s/article/What-is-DashPass

[7] What Is Reddit Premium? a Guide to Reddit's Membership Tier

https://www.businessinsider.com/reference/what-is-reddit-premium

[8] [9] Reddit is killing its Gold awards system | TechCrunch