Live data from Hacker News

Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

blog.asmartbear.com

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#51
eh, for me? I am type A mostly because I don't enjoy negotiation and hard sales. If you have an expensive product, at least in my sector, you are expected to negotiate, sometimes for months on price. Then you are expected to give a discount to the customers that waste the most of your time.

With low-value products? Here is the price. want it? If you want to change the price, sure, sometimes you need to do that, but you change it for everyone. (In fact, in the VPS sector, It is traditional to change the price for existing customers as well as new customers. Linode deserves some of the credit for making that traditional. In the co-lo or bandwidth business, where it's all negotiated? it's traditional to offer like 50% better deals to new customers and to squeeze your old customers until they leave, like it is in real-estate leases. I recently lowered the price on my low-end co-lo and gave the lower price to all my existing customers, to much surprise. )

Right now, I'm trying to move some products that are traditionally sold with lots of negotiation (Like co-location) into the "here is the price, you want it?" model, which is really in everyone's interest except the salesguy. And salesguys in this industry make a lot of money; two big local co-lo salesguys have contacted me; I know they are good, and that they can bring me customers, as I know a bunch of people that bought through them. The problem? they want 10% of the revenue from the customer for the life of the customer. 10% isn't far from my own target margin for co-lo, and some plans, I don't even make that much. And for the life of the customer? through any upgrades down the road? it seems like a bookkeeping nightmare.

The other advantage of having lots of small customers is that if someone wants something that you don't want to do? (in my case, for instance, people that want password auth to my infrastructure, or people that want to run windows) it's pretty easy for me to say "That's not what I do. Here is a refund; I hear that provider X can help you out" - whereas if that customer was 1/10th of my revenue? I'd be spending all night trying to get a microsoft system working, or cleaning up after a script kiddie broke into a weak password and got into the customer's management interface.

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#52
post #42

I work for a company that has only tens of clients (banks) but each pays us in the hundreds of thousands to millions range, an extreme example of B. Just one of these customers takes up to a year to acquire. On the plus side, things can move more slowly and in a well thought out way. Also, there's no worry around your usual "web scale" issues. There's also a lot of freedom around exploring new ways to do things becau…

Having been on both sides of the Fortune 100 sales cycle, it was always a fun game, as a buyer, to see how close we could get to being written off during the courtship process. Drinks at lunch are the norm, but maxing out the champagne costs, getting box seats at games, etc. Once (if) the sale closed though, it was down to business, and doing our damnedest to maximize both our time and the vendors. I've never worked…

Funny thing is, we're a 25 person company and most of our competitors are much much bigger. However, they're so slow, inflexible and outdated tech wise that we just blow them out of the water with our offering (we charge 2-5x the going rate).

The biggest insight that contributed to our success came from our CFO who realized that big corporate IT is where dreams go to die and that we should route around them as much as is possible.

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#53
I'm not an expert in this topic, but I would say that the many customers at the low price-point are more important than the few high-price one. If you have only 5 high-price customers, which generate the most of your income and they decide to break up the business relations with you, than you have probably a big problem and loose a lot of money. So, I think it's better to have a lot of low price customers, because if some of them break up the business relations with you, then it doesn't matter that much. You have enough low-price customers left, which generate the most of your money and some high-price customers on the top of it, which generate a lot of money as well. So the risk to loose money is probably lower. SAP is a good example. They first produced products for the big and important companies, but they figured out that the middle-class customers generate a lot of money as well. I guess it can differ, but I think it's probably the better decision.

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#54
I am currently close to releasing an app on the iPad and I have done lots of internal debating as to which price to choose. Here is my situation:

-I am entering a smaller addressable market, so I know I won't be able to grow forever and therefore I am focusing on building brand loyalty and getting repeat customers.

-I am planning on releasing new apps at a steady cadence, probably 1/month (it doesnt make sense in my situation to release new content within the app itself).

So with these two things combined, it seems logical to go at a low price-point. A low price point should gather initial customers and then be small enough to keep them coming back month after month. So I am currently leaning towards $1 per app.

But I have heard enough about the app market pricing and from people on this board to give me second thoughts, specifically:

-early users are insensitive to price-point

-ipad app purchasing is very elastic (ie you get the same revs depending on whether you sell it at $1 vs $4 etc)

I've thought a lot about releasing it at a higher price point, $2, maybe even $3. The biggest reason I am leaning towards $1 is the fact that I intend to release many apps and I see each as a microapp and therefore a micropayment. So even though I think one app may be worth more than $1, I think the value of each app over time is logarithmic. Therefore its better to sell 5 at $1 than 2 at $2, etc.

The apps themselves are interactive ebooks focused on military history. (a vague description, but unfortunately I am a few days away from having my website up)

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#55
post #11

Just tossing it out there, but isn't the price point of a product also a big director in consumer expectations? Not that I support making a crappy product, but consumers who pay a lot more generally have higher expectations about what they're spending their money on (rightly so, at times). If you have a 1000 people who figure it's the price of a soda so who cares vs 10 people who won't get off your case about some pe…

You'd be surprised! In my experience, folks who pay A WHOLE NINETY NINE CENTS OF MY MONEY have very shockingly high expectations of polish / quality / feature selection (but no desire to e.g. read what the software actually does), whereas if someone signs e.g. a contract for $X0,000 for enterprise software, it lacks a feature, and they ask for it, "Thanks for the feedback, we'll consider adding that in a later releas…

"In my experience, folks who pay A WHOLE NINETY NINE CENTS OF MY MONEY have very shockingly high expectations of polish / quality / feature selection (but no desire to e.g. read what the software actually does)"

What you do? You shut them out.

Not "remote disable them". But feature/support requests policy has to be simple. Either a user forum, FAQ, etc

You should absolutely not waste your precious time with this kind of work. If they want a refund just give it to them (not sure how easy this is on App Store or others)

Also, if this is so overwhelming, raise the price If they really want this so much they can pay 1.99

You don't need to ignore everything they say, but take it with a huge grain of salt.

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#57
If your product needs zero rework for each sale (and scales easily), many customers is the obvious way. If it requires a sales process (even if it's as simple as signing a contract), less customers (paying more) is the way.

Personally, I prefer the "less customers" approach. I find it much easier to pleas everyone and feel like I'm not "working for free" when "everyone" is a relativelly small group and the payback is still high

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#58
post #17

Easy...both. Keep the $10/mo plans for consumers. And offer the $1,000/mo enterprise plans for enterprise. That way your cheap customers will drive a lot of your high end sales.

In my experience, this is very hard to do well. What you'll usually get is either a lot of prospects that would pay for the high-tier end up paying less, thus dramatically reducing your profitability for the sake of "having an option for everyone"

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#59
post #44
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's up to you to define your product line. nothing is stopping you from just limiting the products. Normal Accounts? Max 5-20 users. Enterprise? Unlimited Users no real difference between the products except for a single value

It's fine to have two products for different segments within the consumer or business markets, but having one product for consumers and another for businesses is not as simple as changing a single value. Very different customers with different needs, demands, and expectations of your product.

So why differentiate, other than with a value that clearly segments them?

This is not unlike Apple's laptop plan - before it was retired, the plastic unibody 13" macbook and 13" aluminum macbook pro had almost no distinctions to a consumer aside from exterior.

Re: Which is better: Many customers at low price-point or few at high price?

#60
I view the acquisition as a tradeoff in whether you'd like to exert a lot of effort upfront or down the road.

If you exert a lot of effort upfront, you can collect a few high-paying customers and provide more tailored support to their needs. Of course the fewer customers you have means each has a greater proportional influence in affecting the direction of your product. That is, assuming customer feedback is something you're interested in, which I acknowledge is not necessarily always the case.

If you would rather exert effort more "constantly" and gradually down the road, than the many customers approach is good. Many apps which end up in this situation do so because of a massive user spike at the point when their app "goes big". In that case, the short-term growth is clearly not gradual, but the long-term growth leading up to that point may be.

My personal preference would be a small to medium customer base to provide more tailored support.

Post reply on HN