Its presence implies that the company both is capable of and is overcharging the people coerced into the higher price tier.
"Overcharging" is a concept without a precise meaning. The SSO-capable version has a feature that cost money to build and support. That it is sold at a higher price (often alongside other enterprise features that cost money to build and support) is not proof that they are overcharging.
Any company that is tying to recoup the costs of building those features will charge the customers that use those features. The existence of a price differential between the 2 editions does not tell you whether they are overcharging.
> The SSO-capable version has a feature that cost money to build and support. That it is sold at a higher price (often alongside other enterprise features that cost money to build and support) is not proof that they are overcharging.
"Price discrimination" is charging a higher price to one set of customers than another. The premise is that they're really getting the same thing but one of them has to pay more in exchange for either nothing or for something whose incremental underlying cost is far less than the incremental price increase, because the company devised a way to artificially segment the market.
If your argument is that the extra feature would actually cost that much even in a highly competitive market because it costs that much more to provide it, what you're really arguing is that they're not engaged in price discrimination.
"Overcharging" is a concept without a precise meaning. The SSO-capable version has a feature that cost money to build and support. That it is sold at a higher price (often alongside other enterprise features that cost money to build and support) is not proof that they are overcharging.
Any company that is tying to recoup the costs of building those features will charge the customers that use those features. The existence of a price differential between the 2 editions does not tell you whether they are overcharging.