Although I agree there can be value to the alternatives you "cheekily" suggest, Casey, I also think you're displaying some traditional "waterfall" thinking here. An agile approach can be based on time yet still be focused on customer satisfaction. For example, if using Scrum, a time-and-materials contract tied to a "sprintly" rate is technically billing by the hour, but the customer gets finished deliverables each sprint. We don't lie to the customer by claiming we can predict what will be delivered by when, at least beyond a single sprint. This also gives them greater opportunities to guide future work, provide immediate feedback, and ultimately control their costs. That's why I recommend what I call an Agile T&M contract in most circumstances, focused on what customers really want. Details at: https://fullscaleagile.com/financial-agility/#_Toc489618783.
Although I agree there can be value to the alternatives you "cheekily" suggest, Casey, I also think you're displaying some traditional "waterfall" thinking here. An agile approach can be based on time yet still be focused on customer satisfaction. For example, if using Scrum, a time-and-materials contract tied to a "sprintly" rate is technically billing by the hour, but the customer gets finished deliverables each sprint. We don't lie to the customer by claiming we can predict what will be delivered by when, at least beyond a single sprint. This also gives them greater opportunities to guide future work, provide immediate feedback, and ultimately control their costs. That's why I recommend what I call an Agile T&M contract in most circumstances, focused on what customers really want. Details at: https://fullscaleagile.com/financial-agility/#_Toc489618783.