There's a difference between financial services and software services.

Financial services inherently must be priced in bps (because they have cost that scales with value due to risk).

Software services typically should be priced based on the amount of value they create for a user (how much value does the user get compared to if they didn't use this software).

Bps-based pricing puts users in a cost-minimization mindset.

Users seek to minimize costs either by negotiating on costs hard, or by minimizing their use ("am I really getting $0.23 of value out of this invoice being generated?)

In any case, the user is constantly in a cost-minimization mindset, which is a transactional mindset.

Software services, if priced properly, incentivize people to invest in and heavily use the tools in ways that create value for them.

That is, users are encouraged to lean on storing data in them so they become more useful to them, building their workflows around them.

The more that a user bases their workflows around a tool, the more they're building a little moat around themselves and the tool, making it require more work to redo it all to go to another solution.

You get more of a value-creation mindset, "is this the service I want to partner with for the long term".

If you mix financial services and software services, the cost-minimization user mindset will taint all of it.

For very small users, the "just one simple price, we get paid when you get paid" is simple and works well, but as users grow this tension will have a more negative effect.

When looking at the core value a service offers, if you split it up into financial services and software services per job-to-be-done, you can figure out which sub-components to approach differently.

Properly compartmentalizing these effects in how you commercialize your products can have a transformative effect on a business.