[fishpen0]

Unless of course you are a small fish who just needs sso for compliance and for some reason you get to pay like you are a $5B conglomerate despite still very much preferring to just pay an advertised price and not spend a month of people's time in negotiations

[TeMPOraL]

> a small fish who just needs sso for compliance

Unfortunately, a need for SSO is about the only reliable way to gouge a large corporation. As a small fish you may like SSO, want SSO, you may even think you need SSO, but you really can get by without just fine. You're small - you can get around the requirements, or pivot, or whatever. A corporation is big and slow and can easily get themselves into a situation where not adding SSO will become a blocker for deals denominated in double-triple digit millions, but abandoning your product or the whole business segment will cost similar amount of money. In that situation, the vendor can have a field day milking the cash cow.

[Aeolun]

> but you really can get by without just fine

The more time goes on, and the cheaper actually running SSO becomes, the less this is true. Props to Github for allowing me to do SSO on my 1 man enterprise for $21/month.

Even if you have just 20 people, not having to manage separate sign in’s on all services is just so pleasant. Not pleasant enough to jump from $2400/year to $24k/year on all 10 of them though.

[kuschku]

> As a small fish you may like SSO, want SSO, you may even think you need SSO, but you really can get by without just fine.

SSO is the only way to get 2FA working without the friction becoming prohibitive.

If SSO is a paid feature, only in some plans, you're selling an insecure product. You wouldn't make security patches exclusive to the enterprise plan, you shouldn't make 2FA/SSO exclusive either.

[OccamsMirror]

I feel this in my bones. Enterprise price haggling is the bane of my existence.

[IG_Semmelweiss]

you should then make a point to buy SaaS that puts pricing on their page. Cater to good practices.