Software companies are leaving money on the table because their core financial systems haven’t kept pace with the way they sell pay-per-use services, which often now incorporate AI capabilities.

According to a survey of 350 execs who work for software vendors, conducted by PwC UK and billing infrastructure biz m3ter, 44 percent of UK business leaders say they have trouble measuring the consumption of usage-based software.

PwC and m3ter claim this measurement blind spot leads to revenue leakage – the gap between the value of what the company sells and the amount actually billed.

This can take the form of failure to capture usage data, like a subscription overage fee that isn’t tracked. Or it might reflect out-of-date pricing information, or billing calculation errors.

M3ter claims that between 4 and 7 percent of annual recurring revenue is potentially at risk from unsophisticated bookkeeping.

AI services can compound the problem, with the pricing of AI software and services often opaque and difficult to predict.

With regard to the way that AI complicates billing for companies that use it in their products, the research points to PwC’s 2026 CEO survey that found “only 30 percent of companies surveyed reported increased revenue from AI in the last 12 months.”

“The monetisation opportunity exists, but it is clear that converting AI capability into sustainable, auditable revenue remains a challenge,” the PwC/m3ter report states.

“A useful comparison is with the cloud infrastructure sector,” Griffin Parry, CEO and co-founder of m3ter, said in an email. “They had similar challenges and over time they developed greater transparency, via both better pricing design and better accessibility of usage and spend data.”

But the survey results aren’t solely reflective of black-box AI billing – sometimes it’s just inefficient business processes like tracking multiple product lines that combine seat-based and usage-based billing in a spreadsheet.

The PwC/m3ter survey found that 87 percent of respondents reported that their billing systems and their ERP or general ledger systems were not integrated. And 48 percent said there was no integration between billing and CRM systems.

Parry argues that transparency is a key theme for corporate customers, in terms of pricing design and the accessibility of usage and billing data.

“Good usage pricing should be easy for customers to understand, easy for them to predict (i.e. they can estimate how much they’d pay in real world scenarios), and with the variable element attached to a good proxy for value (i.e., so that if they use more of your service, they’ll associate that with being successful),” said Parry. “That’s one way of interpreting transparency, the opposite of opaque.”

Parry went on to say that customers won’t be satisfied with one monthly invoice that summarises usage-based spending.

“Instead, they’ll want to be able to access information about their usage and spend on a near-real-time basis, and for this data to be detailed – i.e., they want access to a usage and billing dashboard, as, say, AWS customers do,” he explained. “That’s the other way of interpreting transparency, access to the data that drives bills.”

Half of VMware users plan to reduce their use of the virtualisation pioneer’s products by 2028, according to a survey by independent analyst firm Virtified.

Virtified principal Michael Warrilow, a former Gartner analyst specialising in cloud and virtualisation, said VMware users are uncomfortable with Broadcom’s strategy of only selling a complete private cloud bundle – Cloud Foundation 9 (VCF 9).

Some users feel the cost of VCF 9 is beyond their means, Warrilow said. Others don’t want all the tools in Cloud Foundation, or the complexity of operating them. Users with those issues will therefore assess their virtual machine fleet and move some to another platform.

The analyst said many migrations are already under way, but believes not all will result in smaller Broadcom bills. Warrilow said he’s heard that when Broadcom gets a whiff of customers down-sizing their VMware estates, it offers less generous discounts – or no discount at all.

Bills may also stay high because migrating away from VMware before the October 2027 end-of-support date for its version 8.x products will be hard to achieve. Warrilow expects many users will therefore find themselves needing to reluctantly acquire VCF 9 to stay compliant.

Others will wait it out past that date, to align a move to a different virtualisation platform with a hardware refresh. Those who choose to continue with unsupported software will likely face a license audit that, if it shows a user will need more entitlements, sees Broadcom offer software at list price or minimal discount.

“Broadcom is hoping this all goes in the too hard basket and you do the upgrade,” he said.

Warrilow said those who don’t plan to reduce their VMware estate may have reached that decision due to various factors that prevent an easy or economical migration. He said lack of suitable VMware alternatives, an inability to move to the cloud, and low risk appetite are among the reasons that some users decide to stay put.

He also thinks those who stick with VMware may well enjoy the experience.

“There is the chance to get greater density and lower license costs,” he said. “And it is possible the engineering of the product will get better. There’s a lot less bickering in the Broadcom era, and potential for a more unified product.”

“But right now VCF 9 includes stuff that people didn’t want unified.”

Warrilow’s findings are drawn from a survey he conducted – using the same market research company he used while at Gartner – that surveyed 450 VMware users across 14 countries. Respondents came from the ranks of operations, infrastructure, architecture, and procurement teams, at companies with over 500 employees. The analyst has also prepared documents he calls “Loops,” that assess the main VMware alternatives.

Like other analysts, he rates VMware as the market leader, but feels Nutanix, Microsoft, and Red Hat are closing the gap.