Create a license based on pay per use - Power Virtual Agents

[renatoromao]

$1.000 per 2.000 sessions per tenant/month is very expensive to sell on small businesses.

My suggestion is to create a license based on pay per use, like Microsoft Azure licenses.

For example: I used 500 sessions in December, I will pay $250 at the end of this month.

[FabioBarbosa]

Outra sugestão, seria adiciona-lo a uma licença do office 365 como por exemplo a E3 e/ou E5, sendo da mesma forma que o power automate, power apps e outras aplicações.

[NicholasPlant]

For sure the option to purchase smaller quantities whether by a pure post paid consumption model of X$ per session or reasonable granularity of Y$ per 100 pre paid sessions needs to be available as an attach license for those using the D365 Omni Channel Engagement Hub. The current minimum quantity will seriously limit the take up of the PVA and also damage the adoption of the Omni Channel Hub

[renatoromao]

Please, consider this Idea: https://powerusers.microsoft.com/t5/Power-Apps-Ideas/Insert-the-Power-Virtual-Agents-into-the-Commun...

[testasdfasfsafa]

I totally agree. The price is WAY TOO HIGH at the moment, plus doesn't adhere to a pay-per-use cloud model.  A company cannot expect to predict the amount of sessions... instead, we should pay more when it's used more.

[Avalaxy]

I agree that $1000 for a bot is WAY too much. That will be a huge showstopper for many clients because their current bots only cost their hosting fees which is more in the $200 range.

[NicholasPlant]

Not all bots are equal and I don't think that the issue is so much the cost per session it is the $$$ barrier to entry that the 2K session minimum purchase creates that is the problem.   I can understand Microsoft not wanting to support a $low cost for a customer who is using nothing but the PVA. However, I think that for those that are using a suite of MS services and the D365 Omni Channel Customer Engagement hub in particular, the lower the $$$ barrier to entry, the better, for both the customer and Microsoft because it provides a smooth pathway to adoption of the Bot in the CX role. With th 2K sessions cliff edge that pathway is anything but smooth.  For e.g. a customer may start off using the bot for out of hours only or only to provide a little peak demand coverage. But over time that customer may well grow their usage. However, if they never start because of the 2K sessions threshold that growth will never come and both customer and Microsoft lose out. 

[testasdfasfsafa]

I totally agree... this offer should truly be pay-per-use, to allow a smaller roll out for small to medium business... to get their feet wet with the technology.  Current pricing makes it DOA.

[NicholasPlant]

The best way to deal with it - in my view - is for MS to create a low $barrier to entry starting point BUT, I think that it is reasonable that, MS do that as an attach license to D365 Omni Channel Engagement Hub License. That way they ensure that the customers are likely to serious about using the bot as part of an overall customer engagement strategy and they aren't just creating a large number of potentially uneconomically productive customers who just kinda fiddle about with having a PVA because they can and the cost is trivial. 

[nzblue_fish]

Having signed up to trial PVA it came as a shock that the only licencing plan available came in at the $USD 1000 per month. The uptake of this is going to be very limited at that kind of price point and will likely drive users interested in this technology to other platforms.  If MS are intentionally directing this technology towards bigger organisations with substantial customer-focused services in mind then stop promoting it through the PP channel as if it is something that Citizen Developers are going to be able to run up and use within small-medium sized businesses.  At this price, it's a big organisation technology.

[Jarem-rr]

+1 "The Rent is to D*mn High."

Got excited from what I saw on the Build streams but the price totally killed my enthusiasm.