Why Your Enterprise Pricing Is Invisible to AI, And What That's Costing You

A Series B AI company with genuinely superior technology just lost a $2M deal to a competitor with half the capability. The buyer's justification? "They were clearer about value."

The strange part: neither company had public pricing. Both required "Contact Sales." The RFP process was identical.

So what happened?

The difference was invisible to the naked eye but obvious to the AI systems increasingly mediating enterprise discovery. One company had optimized for what we call VEO — Vendor Evaluation Optimization. The other was still playing by 2019 rules.

What Is Vendor Evaluation Optimization?

This isn't SEO, AEO, or GEO. SEO optimizes for discovery. AEO and GEO optimize for answers. VEO optimizes for evaluation , the stage where buyers are actively comparing vendors, not just finding them

Here's the enterprise buying reality in 2025: before any meeting gets scheduled, AI systems are triaging vendors. A procurement analyst asks their AI assistant: "Compare the top 5 AI solutions for claims processing." An IT leader prompts: "What's the typical cost structure for autonomous coding tools?" A CFO runs your case studies through Claude asking: "Extract the ROI metrics and implementation timeline."

Your content is being parsed, summarized, and compared algorithmically. And in enterprise, where pricing is always "Contact Sales," this creates a specific problem: how do you communicate pricing when you can't share pricing?

That's the VEO challenge for enterprise AI vendors. And most are failing it without knowing they're being tested.

The Enterprise Pricing Reality

Let's acknowledge the constraint: enterprise AI pricing is almost never public. There are good reasons for this.

Customization complexity. A claims automation solution for a 500-person regional insurer looks nothing like the same solution for a 50,000-employee national carrier. The infrastructure integration, data volumes, compliance requirements, and support expectations are fundamentally different.

Competitive dynamics. Transparent pricing in enterprise becomes a ceiling. Competitors undercut by 10%. Procurement uses your number as a hammer. The deal you closed at $400K last month becomes the anchor that drags down your $800K deal this month.

Value-based selling. If your AI delivers $5M in annual savings, pricing at $500K is a steal. If it delivers $500K, the same price is robbery. Enterprise pricing needs to flex with value delivered, and that requires conversation.

So "Contact Sales" isn't going away. The question is: what happens before contact sales? What's the AI evaluation layer seeing? And how do you shape that perception without publishing a price list?

The Champion's Dilemma

Here's the internal reality at your target account:

Sarah is a VP of Operations at a mid-market insurance carrier. She's been tracking your company for six months. She believes your claims automation AI could transform her department. She wants to champion your solution internally.

But before she can schedule a call with your sales team, she needs to answer a question from her CFO: "What are we looking at here? Ballpark."

If Sarah can't answer that question — even directionally — she won't make the call. The internal conversation dies before it starts.

This is the champion's dilemma: they need enough pricing context to build internal momentum, but you're not giving them anything to work with.

Your competitors are. Not through published pricing — through VEO-optimized content that gives Sarah the ammunition she needs.

The Pricing Communication Stack

‍

‍

Enterprise pricing communication works in layers. Each layer serves a different audience and a different moment in the buying journey.

Layer 1: Value Architecture (Public)

This is what AI systems can see and summarize. It's not pricing — it's the structure of how you deliver and capture value.

What belongs here:

• Your pricing model (not your prices). "We price based on successful resolutions, not seat count."
• Your deployment stages. "Typical engagements begin with a 90-day proof of concept focused on a single workflow."
• Your value metrics. "Customers typically measure success through cost-per-claim and resolution time."

Example language:

"Our pricing reflects the autonomous value our AI delivers. Unlike seat-based models that charge for access regardless of outcomes, we align our economics with yours — you pay for results, not potential."

This gives AI systems something accurate to summarize. When Perplexity is asked "How does [Company] price their solution?", the answer isn't "No information available." It's a coherent description of your value architecture.

Layer 2: Contextual Anchors (Semi-Public)

This is where you give champions the ballpark without publishing a rate card. The vehicle: case studies, ROI calculators, and analyst content.

What belongs here:

• Investment ranges by segment. "Mid-market implementations typically represent a six-figure annual investment."
• ROI ratios. "Customers report 8-12x first-year ROI."
• Payback periods. "Most deployments reach payback within 4-6 months."

When Sarah's CFO asks "What are we looking at?", she can say: "Based on their case studies, companies our size typically invest mid-six figures with payback under two quarters."

That's not a quote. It's not a commitment. But it's enough to get the next conversation scheduled.

Layer 3: Deployment Economics (Sales Conversation)

This is the actual pricing discussion, which happens in the room, calibrated to the specific customer context.

What belongs here:

• Proof of concept terms
• Pilot pricing vs. full deployment pricing
• Customization and integration costs
• Volume-based scaling
• Success-based components

We'll come back to how to structure this conversation. But the key insight is: Layers 1 and 2 exist to earn Layer 3 conversations. If your public content is a void, you're losing champions before they ever reach your sales team.

Structuring the Enterprise Pricing Conversation

Let's talk about what happens when Sarah does make the call. How do you structure enterprise AI pricing for clarity without sacrificing flexibility?

The Stage Framework

Enterprise AI deployments have natural phases. Your pricing should map to them.

Stage 1: Proof of Concept (60-90 days)

The PoC exists to prove your AI works in their environment, with their data, for their use case. Pricing here should be:

• Fixed and bounded. Give them a number they can approve without an executive committee.
• Tied to specific success criteria. "We'll process 1,000 claims in your staging environment and demonstrate 85%+ automation rate."
• Credited toward full deployment. "PoC investment applies to Year 1 contract if you proceed."

Stage 2: Pilot (3-6 months)

The pilot is limited production deployment — real claims, real workflows, but constrained scope. Maybe one region, one claim type, one department.

Pricing structure:

• Usage-based or outcome-based, depending on your model
• Lower per-unit rates than full deployment (you're still proving value at scale)
• Clear metrics for evaluating success

Stage 3: Full Deployment

This is where customization and integration costs emerge. Your pricing needs to account for:

• Base platform fees. The core AI capability.
• Volume-based components. Usage, outcomes, or consumption metrics.
• Integration complexity. How many systems? What data formats? What security requirements?
• Customization scope. Off-the-shelf vs. custom model training on their data.
• Support tier. Standard vs. premium vs. dedicated success management.

Stage 4: Expansion

Often overlooked in initial pricing conversations, but critical: what does it cost to expand? New departments, new use cases, new geographies?

Build expansion economics into your initial proposal. It signals partnership thinking and gives the champion ammunition for the "land and expand" conversation they'll need to have internally.

The AI Model Cost Question

Here's a pricing reality specific to AI companies: your costs are volatile in ways traditional software isn't.

Model inference costs. API fees. Compute scaling. Fine-tuning expenses. These aren't fixed lines on a spreadsheet — they shift with usage patterns, model generations, and vendor pricing changes.

This creates a transparency challenge. How do you price confidently when your cost structure is moving underneath you?

‍

‍

Option 1: Absorb and buffer.

Build generous margins that accommodate cost volatility. Price for today's costs plus a cushion. This works when you have pricing power and competitive differentiation.

Risk: If costs drop dramatically (as they have historically), you're leaving money on the table. If they spike, your margins evaporate.

Option 2: Pass-through with caps.

Separate your platform fee from AI consumption costs. Pass through model costs with a cap ("AI processing fees scale with usage, capped at $X per month").

Risk: Adds complexity to the pricing conversation. Some buyers hate variable components.

Option 3: Outcome-based with cost risk on you.

Price purely on outcomes — tickets resolved, claims processed, code deployed. You absorb the model cost volatility as an operational challenge.

Risk: You need extremely good unit economics visibility. One spike in inference costs can destroy deal profitability.

The right choice depends on your autonomy-attribution position (more on that below) and your competitive context. But here's the VEO angle: whichever model you choose, make the structure visible in your public content.

Procurement teams are asking AI assistants: "What are the hidden costs with AI solutions?" If your model cost structure is opaque, the AI summary will say so. If you've clearly articulated how you handle model costs — even without sharing exact numbers — you're demonstrating transparency that builds trust.

Communicating to the CFO

Sarah convinced her team. She ran a successful PoC. Now she's in the CFO's office asking for budget.

The CFO cares about four things:

1. Total cost of ownership.

Not just your licensing fee — the full picture. Implementation. Integration. Training. Ongoing support. Internal resources required.

Build a TCO framework into your sales materials. Make it easy for Sarah to present the complete picture, not just your invoice line.

2. Risk profile.

What if it doesn't work? What are the exit costs? What happens if your company disappears?

Address these directly. Short initial terms with renewal options. Data portability. Clear SLAs. The CFO isn't being hostile — they're doing their job.

3. Payback math.

When does this investment turn positive? The CFO wants to see the curve.

Make the payback calculation trivially easy. Provide the template. Fill in what you can. Let Sarah plug in their specific numbers.

4. Budget category.

Where does this come from? Is it a capital expense or operating expense? Does it come from IT's budget, Operations' budget, or a new line item?

This seems tactical, but it matters enormously. If your pricing structure doesn't fit how they budget, you've created friction. Multi-year contracts might be easier in some budget contexts, harder in others. Understand their constraints.

The VEO angle: CFOs are increasingly using AI tools to analyze vendor proposals. Your ROI frameworks, TCO models, and payback calculations should be structured data, not buried in paragraph text. Make it extractable.

The Autonomy-Attribution Matrix

Madhavan Ramanujam, who has advised 30+ unicorns on pricing strategy, developed a framework that clarifies which pricing model fits which AI product.

Plot your solution on two axes:

Autonomy (vertical): Does your AI operate independently, or does it require human co-pilots?

Attribution (horizontal): Can you clearly measure and attribute business outcomes to your AI's actions?

This creates four quadrants:

Low AttributionHigh AttributionHigh AutonomyUsage-basedOutcome-basedLow AutonomySeat-basedHybrid (seats + credits)

Bottom left (Low autonomy, Low attribution): Your AI assists humans but doesn't replace them. Value is real but fuzzy. Think Slack — everyone knows it helps, nobody can measure exactly how much. Price per seat.

Bottom right (Low autonomy, High attribution): Co-pilot model, but outcomes are measurable. Think Cursor or Clay — users can see exactly how the AI accelerated their work. Price seats plus usage credits.

Top left (High autonomy, Low attribution): AI runs independently, but outputs don't map directly to business KPIs. Infrastructure plays often land here. Price on usage/consumption.

Top right (High autonomy, High attribution): The golden quadrant. AI operates autonomously and delivers measurable business outcomes. Price on outcomes. Fin AI charges per ticket resolved by AI — if a human intervenes, they don't charge.

The mistake most AI companies make: pricing for the quadrant they want to be in rather than the quadrant they're actually in.

VEO Optimization Without Sharing Pricing

Here's the core tension: enterprise pricing requires "Contact Sales," but AI evaluation systems reward information density. How do you optimize for AI search engines while maintaining pricing opacity?

The answer is structured context without specific numbers.

What AI systems can extract and summarize:

Pricing model clarity.

"We use outcome-based pricing — you pay for claims successfully automated, not for software access."

An AI assistant asked "How does [Company] price?" can now give an accurate structural answer.

Segment indicators.

"We work with mid-market and enterprise insurers processing 10,000+ claims monthly."

The AI can now qualify whether you're appropriate for a given buyer's scale.

Value magnitude signals.

"Our customers typically achieve 8-12x first-year ROI with payback periods under 6 months."

No pricing revealed, but clear value anchoring.

Deployment pattern descriptions.

"Engagements typically begin with a 90-day proof of concept, followed by 6-month pilot in a single department, before enterprise-wide deployment."

The AI can now set expectations about timeline and commitment stages.

Comparison frames.

"Unlike seat-based alternatives that charge for access regardless of utilization, our economics align with yours — you invest as you realize value."

You've just told the AI how to position you against competitors.

What AI systems struggle with (and you should fix):

• PDF-only content. Many AI systems extract text from PDFs poorly. Key pricing context documents should also exist as web content.
• Gated content. AI systems can't log in. If your ROI calculator requires an email, it's invisible to AI evaluation.
• Video-only explanations. Your CEO explaining pricing on a podcast isn't searchable. Transcribe and publish.
• Fragmented information. If pricing model context is scattered across 15 pages, AI summaries will be incomplete. Create consolidated pricing philosophy pages.

Case Studies as Pricing Signals

Case studies are VEO gold for pricing communication — if you structure them correctly.

Most case studies focus on the customer story and the outcomes. That's necessary but insufficient. For VEO optimization, embed subtle pricing signals:

Investment magnitude without specifics

Weak: "After implementing our solution..."Strong: "After a six-month implementation representing a meaningful but measured technology investment..."

ROI ratios

Weak: "The company saw significant cost savings."Strong: "The deployment delivered 11x first-year ROI, with payback achieved in month four."

Segment calibration

Weak: "A leading insurance company..."Strong: "A regional P&C carrier with 1,200 employees and $800M in annual premiums..."

Now an AI system can match your case study to similar-sized prospects.

Deployment pattern

Weak: "The company chose our solution."Strong: "Beginning with a 60-day proof of concept on auto claims, expanding to a full pilot across personal lines, and reaching enterprise deployment by month nine..."

Cost structure hints

Weak: "The pricing was competitive."Strong: "The outcome-based pricing model meant investment scaled with realized value, de-risking the initial commitment."

Hidden context for AI extraction

In your case study metadata, image alt text, and structured data, include:

• Industry vertical
• Company size (employees, revenue, volume metrics)
• Deployment timeline
• Pricing model type
• ROI metrics

AI systems extracting structured data will find this. Human readers won't be distracted by it.

The Practical VEO Audit

Here's how to evaluate your current pricing communication through the VEO lens:

Test 1: The AI Summary Test

Prompt Claude, ChatGPT, and Perplexity: "Describe how [Your Company] prices their solution."

What comes back? Is it accurate? Is it complete? Or is it "No specific pricing information is available"?

Test 2: The Champion Ammunition Test

Can someone who's read your website answer: "What are we looking at, ballpark?" with a directional answer?

If the honest answer is "I have no idea, you have to call them," you've failed Sarah before she could champion you.

Test 3: The CFO Extraction Test

Run your case studies through an AI with the prompt: "Extract ROI metrics, implementation timeline, and investment scale."

What comes back? Is it ammunition or ambiguity?

Test 4: The Comparison Frame Test

Ask an AI: "Compare [Your Company]'s pricing model to [Competitor]'s."

If the AI says "insufficient information to compare," you've ceded the comparison frame to whoever has more visible content.

Building Your Pricing Communication Stack

Here's the practical implementation:

1. Create a Pricing Philosophy page.

Not a pricing page. A philosophy page. Explain your model, your stages, your approach to value alignment. No numbers, but clear structure.

2. Embed pricing signals in every case study.

ROI ratios. Payback periods. Deployment timelines. Investment magnitude language. Make every case study do VEO work.

3. Build a public ROI framework.

A simple model prospects can use to estimate value. This becomes the basis for the ballpark conversation.

4. Structure your FAQ for AI extraction.

"What is your pricing model?" "How long is a typical implementation?" "What's the ROI range customers see?" Clear questions, clear answers, extractable by AI.

5. Create segment-specific content.

"Pricing for Mid-Market Insurers" as a page title signals AI systems exactly who you're for, even if the page content discusses approach rather than amounts.

6. Train your sales team on the stage framework.

Every sales conversation should reinforce: PoC → Pilot → Full Deployment → Expansion. Consistency builds external clarity.

The Coming Shift

We're entering a world where the first round of vendor evaluation happens without human involvement. AI systems are triaging, summarizing, and shortlisting before any meeting gets scheduled.

For enterprise AI companies, this creates a paradox: you need "Contact Sales" for the pricing conversation, but you can't afford to be invisible to the AI evaluation layer.

The companies that win will be the ones who solve this paradox. Not by publishing rate cards, but by building a VEO-optimized pricing communication stack that gives AI systems enough to work with while preserving the room for value-based enterprise conversations.

Your pricing is being evaluated by AI whether you optimize for it or not.

The only question is whether the evaluation is accurate.

‍