When a prospect lands on a call with us, one of the first questions I'm trying to answer — silently, not out loud yet — is whether this is a subscription engagement or a project engagement.
It's not a pricing question. It's a fit question. Different shapes of work want different commercial structures. Getting the shape wrong makes both sides unhappy.
Here's the test we run, simplified.
The project shape
A one-off project fits when:
- There's a specific, bounded artifact being produced. A rebrand. A launch. A pitch deck for a fundraise.
- There's a clear endpoint. After delivery, the client doesn't need continuous output from us.
- The client has internal capacity to maintain what we built.
- The budget is lump-sum accessible — they can spend $40K–$200K once and not again.
Most rebrands fit this. Most launch campaigns fit this. Most one-time marketing pushes fit this.
The subscription shape
A subscription fits when:
- There's continuous output needed — weekly or monthly. Content, campaigns, refinements, rollouts.
- The work is cross-disciplinary: the client needs a designer and a writer and sometimes an engineer, but not a full-time of any one.
- The client doesn't want to hire — either because the need is intermittent, or because they can't justify a full-time creative director.
- The business values consistency and continuity more than maximum monthly output.
Most scaling startups fit this. Most service businesses with ongoing marketing needs fit this. Most founders who've tried the agency hamster wheel and want something that doesn't re-onboard every quarter fit this.
The hybrid — and why we still offer it
Some engagements start as a project and transition to subscription. This is increasingly common:
- A brand refresh (project) → rollout across surfaces (subscription)
- An AI agent build (project) → ongoing tuning + content work (subscription)
- A website launch (project) → monthly iteration on conversion (subscription)
We quote the project first, execute it, and then — if there's a natural subscription continuation — we offer it without pressure. The client decides.
The anti-patterns
Two shapes that look like subscriptions but aren't:
Retainer-as-discount (bad). Client wants project-shaped work but structures it as a retainer to lock in a lower rate. This fails because the client's usage is bursty, our team planning can't flex, and resentment builds on both sides.
Subscription-as-hedging (bad). Client isn't sure what they need, so they sign up for a subscription as a way of deferring the decision. The subscription floats along producing miscellaneous output, no one's thrilled, churn comes at month 6.
We try to catch both of these on the first call. If we spot the pattern, we steer the client toward the shape that actually fits — even if that shape is cheaper than what they initially asked for.
The rule of thumb
If the work stops, does the business stop? If yes → subscription. If no → project.
It's not perfect. It's close enough that it's the first filter we apply, and it's right most of the time.
One more thing
The commercial shape changes how we think, not just how we bill. Project mode pushes us toward discrete excellence: make this one artifact perfect. Subscription mode pushes us toward continuity: make this system keep working without our constant attention.
Both are valuable. They just need different muscles. Getting the shape right up front means we can deploy the right muscle.