Fable (Mythos) dropped from its originally announced ~$125 per million output tokens to ~$50, making it 30–40% more expensive than Opus but often cheaper due to lower token usage.
Where this was said
At 55:13 · chapter starts 54:50
The pricing story around Fable is revealing. It launched at roughly $125 per million output tokens, then dropped to $50 — still 30–40% more expensive than Opus on a per-token basis, but Fable uses significantly fewer tokens per equivalent task. That means Fable often ends up cheaper than Opus in practice, which Theo argues is the death knell for Opus as a standalone model. [1] — Theo "Fable dropped from $125 to $50 per million output tokens, making it 30–40% pricier than Opus per token — but far cheaper overall because it…" 54:50 He's already made peace with paying API prices once the subscription window closes: he spent $150–$200 closing over 30 PRs in a single 5-hour session, and frames it as a magic button he'd press twice a day if he could. Ben agrees that any serious company would make the same calculation. The conversation turns to whether Opus 5 can survive in a world where Fable is this affordable — both hosts think Opus 5 needs to be priced lower than current Opus just to remain relevant.
Fable dropped from $125 to $50 per million output tokens, making it 30–40% pricier than Opus per token — but far cheaper overall because it uses fewer tokens. The result: Opus is dead. Theo won't maintain a $200/month sub for Opus alone, and thinks Opus 5 needs to be cheaper or it won't survive either.
Ben speculated that Fable (Mythos) is likely a 5 to 10 trillion parameter model, making it the largest publicly accessible frontier model by a wide margin.
Ben accidentally ran Fable subagents on xHigh reasoning, burning through roughly 30% of a weekly usage allocation with negligible useful output.
Running Fable subagents from a Fable orchestrator is a fast path to burning 30% of your weekly limit on nothing useful. The right pattern is Fable commanding cheaper models — Sonnet 5, GLM-5.2, or similar — for implementation work while Fable handles planning, context, and review.
Ad-based monetization works well for game apps where users spend extended time in-session, as seen with Grid and Wordle.
Tool-focused apps like PuffCount are poor candidates for ad monetization because users don't stay in-session long enough.
A hard paywall is a screen that blocks all app features unless the user pays or starts a free trial — it cannot be dismissed.
Mobile apps are primarily monetized through either ads (best for games) or in-app purchases/subscriptions (best for tools).
According to the episode, YouTube outperforms every other social platform for building trust and driving SaaS conversions.
Vasco stated that the majority of his app's user base came directly from his YouTube channel.
SEO Bot features a 'Boost My Domain Rating' button that routes users directly to Listing Bot, an example of in-product cross-selling.
The founder's entire product portfolio is AI-related, making it easier to package products attractively for directories.
The founder attached their SaaS demo to the trending debate about whether AI coding is actually good enough to build a full SaaS product.
We use essential and analytics cookies to run Vuci. To understand how the site is used: Privacy Policy.
Install Vuci on your phone
Add it to your home screen for a faster, app-like experience.
Install Vuci on your phone
Tap the Share button, then “Add to Home Screen”.
A new version is available
Reload to get the latest Vuci.