The pricing changes are unfortunate, yes, since they encourage me to think about querying, which ought to not be the case. The more worrying update here is that Kagi is not grandfathering in legacy plans beyond the next billing cycle, which is a departure from a promise: > If such change to Individual plans is to occur, we plan to grandfather-in all early adopters (meaning all current and future paid customers, up un…
Update to Kagi Search Pricing
131–140 of 239 posts
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#132I've cross checked results when I got stuff I wasn't really expecting and it was nearly the same as google anyway.
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#133Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#134I think that while the pricing is probably quite reasonable when considering the costs involved in search, Kagi is up against a mentality that web search is free. Because that has been the way it has been for all people's memory. I know it has never really been "free" because our data has been exploited by Google, and the likes. However, most people don't think that far - as is evident by the fact that Google, et al grew to the behemoths that they have become.
I think they will probably need some way to ease people in to the idea of search being a paid service.
Now, I live in one of the richest countries in the world, and when I pitch Kagi Seach to my friends, family and co-workers, they balk at the idea of it being a paid service.
Some of these people are software engineers or IT professionals who rely heavily on search and who stands to benefit the most from the increased quality. And these are the same people who often complains about Google's declining search quality and SEO spam, etc. But still, Google is "Good Enough" and it is "free". So this is what Kagi is up against.
So I think they probably need some better free tier to get people to actually experience the difference in quality. I know that the free tier is likely a huge loss leader and there is some limit to how much Kagi can provide as free.
I have thought about this quite a lot since started using Kagi initially with a free tier account. My free tier account is limited to N searches per month. I run out of that number of searches in a typical workday. Problem is that I set my default search engine to Kagi on all my devices. This means that when I just type some single word just to get to a website, say, "reddit", "amazon", etc. That counts towards my limit. So that when I actually need a quality search result because I need to search for a solution to some rare error condition or similar, then I will have run out of free searches.
So one idea I have thought a bit about is: not all searches are equal. This goes both for the value of the search result for the user as well as the cost of executing the search query. Some common terms like one word queries such as "facebook", "amazon", "apple", etc. would likely be trivial to cache and thus not cost as complex queries that are also likely unique.
I think they should consider making non-unique, one word searches does not count towards the limit. And I would also strongly consider not having such queries require a login. The reason being that this would let many more people get started with Kagi.
And also, if I am to pay even a single cent for a search that is trivial, I would go out of my way to ensure that Kagi is not a default search engine on any devices and I would try my search on one of the other engines first. Even if the cost is trivial - but it is still there and it is something I am conscious about. And what is worse: I now have a variable cost I need to worry about...
Also, I think they really need to get companies on board for this. But most companies have very strict policies regarding recurring fees.
That is, until the mentality around search being free changes... And solving that will likely require investing a lot in giving free searches away. It's a marketing cost. And people really need to experience how the quality and experience of search can be better than Google. Because even though Google sucks most people have a hard time envisioning what an alternative would look like.
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#135Simple math. It's worth it for me. I realise it's possible not many others feel the same, but even if Kagi quintupled their current prices I would still pay for it without batting an eye. Why? Because of the time and effort it saves me. I make around 1500 searches per month. If it saves me 3s per search (I'm 100% convinced it's actually way more), that's saving me 75min in a month. I'm paid more than the unlimited pl…
It is sad that you are being downvoted. The comments are generally the tipical knee jerk rage reaction HN has after they decided to feel "betrayed" by a company, and yours is one of the few not following the groupthink. I dont have anything for or against Kagi, I dont use them and don't care for them. But I see no reason to downvote your comment.
I’m not sure I’d call it a “rage reaction” to object to a 250% price increase. None of the top comments could by any stretch be described as “rage”. If you have to exaggerate to make a point you should always ask why.
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#136If the subscription price is not zero, the included searches are not free. In this regard, the wording of the pricing page mockup and this blog post is dishonest - or at the very least inaccurate. Not a fan of the changes otherwise. I average around 1200 searches per month which would require me to get the unlimited plan. $120/year was already a steep price compared to my other yearly subscription costs: - VPN: §50 -…
You need a paid subscription and additionally each search costs money (except the unlimited subscription) You get X free searches per month. It doesn't seem dishonest or inaccurate to me at all.
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#137The pricing changes are unfortunate, yes, since they encourage me to think about querying, which ought to not be the case. The more worrying update here is that Kagi is not grandfathering in legacy plans beyond the next billing cycle, which is a departure from a promise: > If such change to Individual plans is to occur, we plan to grandfather-in all early adopters (meaning all current and future paid customers, up un…
I’m happy to give them $10 or $25 per month for excellent search and privacy. But I’m really not interested in funding their other junk.
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#138Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find the pricing more annoying than anything. I'm a paid user and I've never come close to using more searches than their claimed cost (which admittedly I don't understand fully, is it just the marginal cost?) So I could probably pick a lower usage plan, it's just one more thing to think about, like back in the days of having to decide which phone minutes plan is better. It sows confusion and doesn't benefit the cu…
Replying to myself re the "AI" The Kagi announcement says this is what it will cost Summarize results: 0-1 searches Summarize document: 0-20 searches (depending on length of the document, this can process 100 page research papers or even books) Ask questions about document: 0-20 searches (depending on the length of the document and the length of interaction) So it's optional, however they also say this: However, inco…
Re: Update to Kagi Search Pricing
#140I cancelled by Kagi subscription because of this. I don't want to have to pause before I search and think "do I need to search for this? should I look through my bookmarks, notes, etc? is this worth one of the 7 searches my $5 plan will cover for the day?". I've been a frequent user of Kagi for the past ~9 months. Last month I made 1600 searches. I've even 'tipped the difference' (~$70) in the past to support Kagi. I…
When I saw this my initial reaction was to cancel, then I checked my usage with the early adopter professional plan it seems I'm mostly covered with 1000 searches a month inlcuded in the $10 subscription. Maybe some months I'll incur a small charge but nothing over $14 I don't imagine. I could also reduce the cost pretty easily if I'm honest. I could stop searching for a site and clicking the result rather than enter…