The Hidden Cost of Unused Software Seats (And How Pay-As-You-Go Solves It)

Introduction,

We have all been there. You purchase a new software tool, optimistic that the whole team will use it daily. Six months later, the CFO sends an email asking why you are paying for ten licenses when the login logs show only two people have signed in this month. This is the "shelfware" reality: organizations frequently pay for significantly more capacity than they actually consume.

For procurement and sales teams, this inefficiency is often driven by rigid licensing models that force you to buy in bulk. When you are paying for seats that sit empty, you are effectively paying a "seat tax" that drains your budget and offers zero return on investment. It leads to the uncomfortable question: "How much money am I wasting on unused RFP software licenses?".

TL;DR: Key Takeaways

The Utilization Crisis: Most companies pay for 5-10 seats, yet internal audits often reveal that only 2-3 people use the platform regularly.
The "Just in Case" Trap: Teams overbuy licenses for Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) or executives who might need access only once or twice a year. (becasuse… dashboards!)
Minimums Force Waste: Platforms often impose minimum user requirements (e.g., 5 or 10 seats), forcing small teams to purchase licenses they do not need.
The Math is Brutal: A standard 10 - seat license where only 3 people are active can result in over $1,600 of wasted spend annually.
The Solution: Credit - based models like BidHawk AI allow you to pay only for the analysis you perform when you perform it, eliminating the cost of unused capacity.

The Seat Utilization Crisis

The traditional software licensing model creates a "seat utilization crisis." Most organizations purchase between 5 to 10 seats for their RFP software to ensure coverage. However, in practice, only 2 to 3 "power users" engage with the platform regularly.

This discrepancy is often caused by the "just in case" trap. You buy a license for the VP of Sales because they might want to check a proposal status. You buy one for Legal because they might need to review terms once a quarter. These "just in case" seats are essentially expensive insurance policies that rarely pay out. Then there is the executive who is looking for the dashboard of everyone’s progress.

The "Minimum User" Trap,

Compounding the issue are the minimum seat requirements imposed by many vendors. These policies create an immediate barrier to efficiency for lean organizations or small teams.

High Minimums: Some platforms impose a 10-user minimum purchase.
Mid - Range Minimums: Others, require a 5-user minimum purchase.

If you are a team of three, these policies force you to pay for ghost employees just to access the software. This "SMB exclusion" effectively locks out small teams or forces them to overpay significantly for tools they barely use - this applies to large organizations with small teams also.

The Wasted Spend Calculator,

To visualize the financial impact of this inefficiency, let's look at the numbers. Consider a standard seat - based pricing scenario versus actual usage.

The Scenario: You purchase a 10-seat license to meet vendor minimums or cover potential SME needs.
The Cost Basis: Assumed cost of $19/month per seat.
Total Annual Cost: 10 seats x $19/month = $190/month ($2,280/year).
The Reality: Only 3 core team members use the software regularly.
The Waste: You are paying for 7 unused seats every month.
7 unused seats x $19/month = $133/month wasted.
Total Annual Waste: $1,600 per year.

Note: This calculation uses a conservative price point. For enterprise - level RFP platforms where seats can cost $49-499/month, the waste scales exponentially, potentially reaching tens of thousands of dollars in unused fees annually.

How AI Analysis Tools Such as BidHawk AI Can Help

The alternative to the subscription "seat tax" is a pay-per-use or credit - based model. BidHawk AI eliminates minimum user requirements and seat - based pricing penalties entirely.

Align Cost with Value: You pay only for the analysis you perform (e.g., scoring a specific proposal or checking compliance), rather than for the capacity to do so. Costs scale with your actual work, not your calendar.
Unlimited Collaboration: Because there are no per - seat fees, teams can share results (PDFs and Excel exports) with unlimited stakeholders without incurring additional costs. This avoids the "collaboration penalty" where companies restrict access to save money.
Perfect for Sporadic Needs: This model is ideal for teams running 5-30 RFPs per year who cannot justify a $20,000 annual subscription that sits idle between projects.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Is a credit - based model actually cheaper than a subscription? For most teams with sporadic or low - volume needs, yes. Analyzing a typical proposal might cost between $25 and $100 in credits. If you run 10 RFPs a year, your total cost is $250 - $1,000, compared to a subscription that could cost $2,000-$20,000+ annually regardless of usage.

2. Can I add users without paying more? With BidHawk AI, yes. Since the model is based on consumption (documents analyzed) rather than seats, you can have multiple team members uploading, downloading, sharing, and reviewing results data in their own platforms without triggering a higher license tier.

3. Does this help with the "shelfware" problem? Absolutely. "Shelfware" occurs when you pay for software you don't use. With a pay - as - you - go model, if you don't use the tool for a month, your cost for that month is zero. You never pay for "shelfware".

Actionable Takeaways

Audit Your Licenses: Review your current software subscriptions. Identify how many seats you are paying for versus how many unique users logged in last month.
Calculate the Waste: Use the formula above ($ Cost per Seat x Unused Seats) to quantify exactly how much budget is being burned by the "Just in Case" trap.
Switch to Consumption Pricing: For analysis and review tasks, move toward tools like BidHawk AI that charge based on the work done (documents analyzed) rather than the number of people watching.
Stop Paying Minimums: If you are a small team, even in a large organization, reject vendors that force you to buy 10 seats for 3 people. Look for tools with no minimum user requirements.