I find that the key thing to overcome when selling to developers is the extreme reluctance to spend money buying something that they can build themselves. You see, 1.) Developers love to build things. 2.) Developers hate spending money. 3.) Developers undervalue their time. If your product looks like it would have been fun to build, you'll lose the entire "insufficiently supervised developer" demographic. Those guys…
This simplified view misses some critical points: - The product won't do things exactly the way you want. If you build it yourself, you get it the way that you wish it had been built. - You're investing in someone else's product. Everything you invest in training and customization is wasted if you have to move to something else. You no longer have to worry about tech support either. - You're locking yourself into som…
For example, I worked at a 30ish person startup that was a little less than half engineers. Our product had a ton of traffic, and our growth/sales teams had outgrown the small bundle of cheap/free marketing tools we'd cobbled together. But marketing automation is expensive—so a couple engineers spent time trying to build our own version, insisting it was doable and that it would fit our use cases much better because it was built for them.
The reality is they spent two months working on a marketing automation solution that kind of worked, but was missing the robustness of a normal product that had been built by a dedicated team of engineers over years. The other issue was that those engineers now owned their solution—bugs, feature requests, etc. they were essentially running a second product now.
Eventually, for the sake of their time and our productivity, we just bought software. We could have done it months earlier and saved everyone time and frustration.
I realize this post is specifically about dev tools, but I think the logic is more or less transferrable.