diff --git a/provider-pricing/regolo.md b/provider-pricing/regolo.md
index 1cff49c..1838405 100644
--- a/provider-pricing/regolo.md
+++ b/provider-pricing/regolo.md
@@ -62,3 +62,38 @@ should be fixed in the same pass (x 1.16 -> $0.0000000174 per pixel).
 Keep a dated section per notice. The next change should be a diff against this file rather than a
 re-derivation — the email link is a login wall, so the numbers only reach us when the operator
 forwards them.
+
+
+## Our actual Regolo usage (measured 2026-10-31, from LiteLLM SpendLogs)
+
+Source: `"LiteLLM_SpendLogs"` in the gateway's Postgres, reached with python + `psycopg` inside the
+gateway container (there is no `psql` there). Models were first used 2026-10-16.
+
+| model | requests | spend | window |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| regolo/qwen3.5-122b | 195 | $2.61 | 2026-10-16 → 10-31 |
+| regolo/qwen-image | 94 | $0.96 | 2026-10-16 → 10-31 |
+| regolo/apertus-70b | 157 | $0.82 | 2026-10-16 → 10-31 |
+| **all Regolo** | **452** | **$4.38** | last 30 days; ~all of it |
+
+Context: total gateway spend is **$426.34** lifetime (104,947 requests, since 2026-09-04), and
+**~$393 in the last 30 days** — greenpt/glm $231.42, deepseek $146.14, gpt-oss $10.32,
+Regolo **$4.38**, other $0.79. So **Regolo is ~1.1% of inference spend, about $4.38/month.**
+
+## Should we take a subscription?
+
+**Almost certainly not at current usage.** A plan has to beat ~$4.38/month to be worth it, and
+Regolo's plan prices are **not published** — the pricing page has a SUBSCRIPTIONS section with no
+figures, which is why the announcement email links into their account portal. Worth one short
+question to them via "Talk to an engineer", not a project.
+
+One thing that is public and useful: their **30-day free trial** grants **1M tokens/day** across
+"All Core Models". Our entire Regolo usage is roughly **120k tokens/day** (≈3.6M/month), i.e. well
+inside that, so the trial — and likely a low tier — would cover everything we currently do.
+
+## The 2026-11-01 change, in money terms
+
+At these volumes the mispricing is small: apertus's input roughly 2.5x-ing on a model that has cost
+**$0.82 lifetime** is about **$1/month** of exposure, and qwen's cut moves ~$0.6/month in members'
+favour. So this is **billing accuracy, not urgency** — but accuracy still matters, because the same
+numbers feed the cost headers members can now read.