Home Solution Competitive edge Pricing Competitor analysis Market insights
Admin Market & pricing insights
Competitor Analysis Market & Pricing Insights

Pricing strategy · WTP · alternatives

How we priced Lumana — and the eight models we rejected before settling on $85 a bed.

Pricing in aged care is harder than SaaS. Operators run on razor-thin margins, regulatory spending is capped, and every dollar on the operator P&L has to displace a dollar of labour. Here's the full strategy — models compared, personas mapped, willingness-to-pay benchmarked, and next-best alternatives surfaced.

Conservative
Floor price
US$60per bed / month
  • $64.8k ARR per 90-bed facility
  • Year 5 revenue: $6.7M
  • Break-even: Year 5
Base case (chosen)
Bundled subscription
US$85per bed / month
  • $91.8k ARR per 90-bed facility
  • Year 5 revenue: $11.9M
  • Break-even: Year 3
Optimistic
Premium band
US$100per bed / month
  • $108k ARR per 90-bed facility
  • Year 5 revenue: $16.8M
  • Break-even: Year 3

Key swing factor: price. Each $10/bed/month shift changes Year-5 EBITDA by roughly $1.4M — which is exactly why we validate WTP inside the paid pilot before a facility-wide rollout.

Pricing models considered

Eight models. One winner. Here's the full trade-off matrix.

Each model is scored 1–5 on fit-for-aged-care (simplicity, CapEx avoidance, ROI visibility, renewal resilience). $85/bed/month bundled won on all four axes.

Recommended Score 4.7 / 5

01 · Bundled per-bed subscription

Hardware, software, support — one SKU, one invoice, one budget line.

US$85 / bed / month · 24-month facility-wide term · $91.8k ARR per 90-bed facility

Why it wins

  • Stays in opex — avoids capex approval chain
  • One invoice, one budget line, one renewal
  • Matches how operators already budget (AIC, AN-ACC)
  • Grant-compatible in HK & SG without restructuring
  • Predictable ARR for investors & for us

Trade-offs

  • Hardware front-loaded — 20 mo payback in Y1
  • Requires 24 mo lock for LTV/CAC to clear
  • Harder to discount individual modules
Considered Score 3.1 / 5

02 · Hardware purchase + SaaS

Buy the sensors upfront; pay a lower monthly software/support fee.

~$1,000 per room + $35 / bed / month · common in B2B IoT

Pros

  • Lower headline subscription number
  • Higher gross margin on recurring SaaS line
  • Clean accounting separation

Cons

  • Capex triggers multi-signature approval (deal-killer)
  • Operator owns the hardware risk for 5+ years
  • No hardware refresh path
  • Kills grant compatibility in HK/SG
Future option Score 3.6 / 5

03 · Outcomes-based pricing

Price tied to measured fall reduction, care-minute compliance lift, or documentation-hour savings.

Base $60/bed/mo + $25 contingent on hitting agreed KPIs

Pros

  • Extreme ROI alignment — buyer sleeps at night
  • Strong investor story if clinical data is robust
  • Unlocks slow-moving risk-averse operators

Cons

  • Requires 12 mo of clinical baseline data (we don't have yet)
  • Revenue uncertainty hurts seed fundraising
  • Measurement disputes become the relationship
  • Best as a Year-3 option, not Year-1 default
Rejected Score 2.7 / 5

04 · Tiered (Core / Pro / Enterprise)

Feature-based tiering — e.g., "fall only", "fall + vitals", "fall + vitals + workflow".

$55 / $85 / $120 per bed / month · classic SaaS tiering

Pros

  • Good-better-best anchors on premium tier
  • Small pilots at Core tier, expansion later
  • Clear upgrade path for operators

Cons

  • Workflow + documentation IS the value — can't downgrade it
  • Sales cycle doubles during tier negotiation
  • Caregivers hate partial-feature deployments
  • Operators self-select into Core and leave ROI on the table
Rejected Score 1.5 / 5

05 · Pay-per-use (per alert)

Charge per high-priority alert or per auto-drafted clinical note.

$0.50 per high-priority alert + $1 per approved note

Pros

  • Zero upfront friction for evaluation
  • Scales naturally with facility acuity

Cons

  • Perverse incentives — we profit from more alerts
  • Unpredictable for operator budgeting
  • Impossible to forecast ARR for investors
  • Clinical governance objections
Rejected Score 1.4 / 5

06 · Free pilots, paid rollout

Give away the 90-day pilot to reduce friction; monetise only at rollout.

Free 90-day pilot + $85 / bed / month on conversion

Pros

  • Maximum pilot volume in Year 1
  • Standard B2B land-and-expand motion

Cons

  • Free pilots signal "not serious" in healthcare procurement
  • $92k hardware + install cost with zero recovery
  • Burns capital on pilots that never convert
  • No commercial skin-in-the-game from operator
Rejected Score 2.0 / 5

07 · Insurance / shared-risk

Partner with liability insurers; price absorbed into facility indemnity premium.

Facility pays insurer; insurer pays Lumana

Pros

  • Operator perceives zero cost
  • Structural ally for scale (insurer distribution)
  • Aligns incentives perfectly

Cons

  • Insurer needs 3+ years of claims data before re-pricing
  • We become a sub-vendor to a slower counterparty
  • AU/HK/SG insurers not yet digital enough
  • Worth revisiting in Year 4
Rejected Score 2.3 / 5

08 · License to nurse-call integrators

White-label Lumana's sensing + workflow into Austco, Tunstall, Inovonics.

$15 / bed / month wholesale · integrator marks up to ~$70

Pros

  • Instant global distribution
  • Zero facility-level sales effort
  • Feeds Vayyar / Xandar Kardian's playbook

Cons

  • Integrator owns the customer relationship
  • Lumana becomes a commodity sensor layer
  • Strands the workflow problem with them
  • Kills brand, pricing power, and the clinical narrative

Target personas

Five operator personas — each with a different price ceiling.

Pricing doesn't land the same way on an ASX-listed chain CFO as it does on a single-facility not-for-profit director. Here are the five personas we sell to, ranked by WTP.

LP

The Listed Private-Pay Chain

CFO / GM Clinical · 1,500+ beds

Premium, private-pay operators (e.g. Opal, Regis, Estia). Audited quarterly on care minutes. Under activist-investor pressure to defend margin without cutting staff hours.

Size800–3,500 beds
Tech sophisticationHigh · has CIO
Buying cycle6–9 mo · RFP
Decision makerCFO + GM Clinical
Key painCare-minute mandate audits
$100–$130 per bed / month · anchored to agency-staff cost displacement
NF

The Mission-Driven Not-For-Profit

CEO / Chair · 200–600 beds

Church- or community-run operators (Helping Hand, Uniting, BaptistCare). Dignity and "zero restraint" language resonates more than ROI slides. Board-led procurement.

Size200–600 beds
Tech sophisticationMedium
Buying cycle9–12 mo · board sign-off
Decision makerCEO + board
Key painStaff burnout, mission alignment
$70–$90 per bed / month · price-sensitive, values dignity narrative
HK

The HK Grant-Funded Operator

Superintendent · 80–200 beds

Subsidised private residences (JCCPA, Helping Hand HK). Access to Jockey Club + ITF grants that cover up to 70% of tech pilots. Procurement runs on grant cycles, not fiscal years.

Size80–200 beds
Tech sophisticationMixed
Buying cycleGrant-cycle driven
Decision makerSuperintendent + Board
Key painCamera pushback, alert fatigue
$75–$95 per bed / month · ~60% grant-subsidised
SG

The SG Nursing Home Operator

COO / CEO · 300–700 beds

Econ Healthcare, Orange Valley, NTUC Health. AIC co-funds up to 50% of ambient monitoring tech. PDPA alignment is essential. MOH pushes dignity-preserving modalities.

Size300–700 beds
Tech sophisticationHigh
Buying cycle6 mo · AIC-led
Decision makerCOO + CEO
Key painPEC/PDPA compliance · staff retention
$85–$110 per bed / month · AIC-reimbursed
FM

The Family-Run Single Facility

Owner-operator · 60–120 beds

Second-generation owner-operators. Personal stake, emotional buyer. Cautious on tech but will move fast when a peer proves it. Pricing sensitivity is HIGH.

Size60–120 beds
Tech sophisticationLow–Medium
Buying cycle3 mo · trust-driven
Decision makerOwner only
Key painCan't recruit nurses
$55–$75 per bed / month · price-led, peer-referenced
HO

The Hospital Transitional Ward

Director of Nursing · 20–80 beds

Sub-acute / post-surgical wards holding patients awaiting aged-care placement. Expansion market beyond Year 3 — the payer is healthcare, not aged care. Higher WTP, shorter cycles.

Size20–80 beds per ward
Tech sophisticationVery high
Buying cycleHospital IT (long)
Decision makerDON + Hospital IT
Key painFall liability, bed-block
$150–$220 per bed / month · anchored to hospital cost-per-bed-day

Willingness to pay

Where $85 sits across personas, benchmarks, and the NBAs.

Vertical line = our $85 base price. Bands = estimated price ceiling per persona. Every band above the line has pricing headroom.

Hospital transitional wardsExpansion market Yr 3+
$150–$220per bed / mo
Listed private-pay chainsOpal, Regis, Estia
$100–$130per bed / mo
SG nursing home operatorsEcon, NTUC, Orange Valley
$85–$110per bed / mo
HK grant-funded operatorsJCCPA, Helping Hand HK
$75–$95per bed / mo
Mission-driven NFPsUniting, BaptistCare
$70–$90per bed / mo
Family-run single facilitiesSecond-gen owner-operators
$55–$75per bed / mo

  Lumana base price ($85) ·   Persona willingness-to-pay band

Next-best alternatives

What operators do if they don't buy Lumana.

The realistic alternatives aren't other ambient-sensing startups — they're the things operators are already doing. Here's what they cost, what they bring, and the friction to switch.

Alternative
What it actually solves
Annual cost (90-bed)
Switching cost
The friction that beats it
Do nothing · hire more
SolvesStatus quo + agency staff for peaks. The "default NBA" for most operators.
Cost$180k+ (1 RN)
SwitchZero
FrictionCan't hire — 110k shortfall by 2030.
Nurse-call pad sensors
SolvesBed-exit + chair-exit alerts. Austco, Inovonics, Tunstall incumbent stack.
Cost~$30k
SwitchLow
Friction52% false-alarm rate → alert fatigue.
Wearables / PERS
SolvesPendant-based fall detection (CarePredict, Lively, Kardian watch).
Cost~$45k
SwitchLow
Friction~80% unused after a fall.
Camera + review system
SolvesSafelyYou / Oxehealth-class vision with human review loop.
Cost~$100k+
SwitchHigh
FrictionPrivacy blocked by regulators + families.
Point radar (Vayyar / Kardian)
SolvesNon-imaging fall/vitals detection — sold as a component.
Cost~$60–80k
SwitchMedium
FrictionNo workflow. No documentation. No end-to-end product.
Clinical documentation AI (standalone)
SolvesVoice-to-note / AI charting (Nuance, Heidi, Lindy). Record-only.
Cost~$25–40k
SwitchLow
FrictionStill depends on staff remembering the event.
Build it in-house
SolvesRare — 1–2 large chains have tried.
Cost$500k+ / year
SwitchVery high
FrictionNever ships, never clinically validated.

Insight: the true competitor is "do nothing + hire more". Every aged-care vendor on our map loses when the operator decides the ROI story is too hard to verify — and Lumana's paid-pilot structure is specifically engineered to close that verification loop in 90 days.

Sensitivity analysis

Price is the dominant swing factor in every year-5 scenario.

Each $10/bed/month shift changes Year-5 EBITDA by roughly $1.4M. Price validation is the single most important thing the first five pilots deliver.

Conservative

If price floors at $60

$6.7M
Year-5 revenue
Year-5 EBITDA$1.5M
Break-evenYear 5
Pilot drop rate25%
Active facilities (Y5)128
Base case (chosen)

At $85 · 3% churn

$11.9M
Year-5 revenue
Year-5 EBITDA$6.5M
Break-evenYear 3
Pilot drop rate20%
Active facilities (Y5)160
Optimistic

If pricing clears $100

$16.8M
Year-5 revenue
Year-5 EBITDA$11.1M
Break-evenYear 3
Pilot drop rate15%
Active facilities (Y5)192

Pricing recommendation

Enter at $85. Validate inside the pilot. Raise after Y2 reference sites are live.

Pricing in aged care isn't a spreadsheet exercise — it's a sequence of decisions each gated by the previous one's evidence. Here's the sequence.

Phase 1 · Year 1–2 · Land at $85

Bundled, facility-wide, 24-month contract. Anchor on care-minute displacement and documentation hours returned. Every pilot must produce publishable before/after metrics — those metrics become the evidence for Phase 2.

  • Target personas: Listed private-pay chains + mission-driven NFPs first; grant-funded HK operators in parallel.
  • Pilot pricing: Pro-rated at $85 for the 90-day paid pilot window.
  • Conversion guardrail: 80% pilot-to-contract conversion required (target 85%).
  • Sales motion: Founder-led. No channel. No resellers. No white-label.

Phase 2 · Year 2–3 · Add outcomes-based ladder for NFPs

Once reference sites have 12+ months of data, offer mission-driven NFPs a hybrid: $60 base + $25 contingent on hitting fall-reduction or care-minute targets. Drops average revenue slightly but unlocks a larger persona.

  • Trigger: 10+ facilities live and 1+ peer-reviewed clinical publication.
  • Expected impact: +25% pipeline volume, -5% blended ARR.
  • Guardrail: Never more than 30% of contracts on outcomes-based structure.

Phase 3 · Year 3–4 · Raise base to $95 for new logos

Grandfather existing contracts at $85. Anchor the $95 price on an updated ROI model that includes Phase-1 clinical data. Singapore entry at $95 uses AIC co-funding headroom. Premium chain tier negotiated at $110+.

  • Trigger: Year-3 EBITDA-positive milestone met.
  • Discount policy: Max 15% off list; no discounts below $80 without CEO approval.
  • Hospital ward expansion: Separate SKU at $180/bed/month; different sales motion entirely.

Phase 4 · Year 4+ · Insurance and white-label optionality

Only once clinical data is publishable and insurer claims data has 3+ years of baselines. These are additional distribution layers, never replacements for direct sales. The brand and pricing power must live with Lumana.

  • Insurance partnerships: AU-first, premium-integrated.
  • White-label caveat: Only to complementary integrators (nurse call), never to direct competitors.
  • Hard line: Lumana never becomes a component SKU.