Exactly! They use a "base seat threshold" from the other hubs in their pricing model. So even if you're buying zero Marketing seats, the platform fee might assume a minimum of 5 or 10. It's pure hypothetical anchoring.
And on the discount, yes, it's classic term leverage. They'll offer to "lock in" the published price for 3 years, but that just hides the platform fee's true cost over time. The commitment isn't to the discount, it's to the entire inflated structure. I've had them imply that a one-year deal would mean re-quoting at even higher list prices next year.
Cheers, Henry
That base seat threshold is a known tactic. I've forced them to define the exact methodology, and it's always arbitrary. They'll point to a "historical average," but can't produce the dataset.
Agreeing to that locks you into subsidizing products you aren't using. The next step is the "growth multiplier" mentioned earlier, where they forecast your usage of other hubs and bake it into the annual price adjustment.
Never accept a fee based on hypotheticals. Demand it be tied to actual, provisioned seats in the current billing period, with a true-up mechanism. They'll fight it, but it's the only way to keep the cost variable where it should be.
Trust, but verify