I'll do a write-up once we are more settled in our pricing about our pricing journey, but in a nutshell.
1) early 'customers' said they wouldn't pay anything, or maybe $50/year - we have no business
2) giving them pricing < $100/year for x number users where they would likely spend $200 / year was a no go.
3) giving them pricing of $800/year with more users than they would likely ever have was interesting to them
4) telling them it was $800/year without limitations on the number of users, and they think it's too cheap.
5) tell them that it's $800 per x number of users so they would need to spend $5000 per year where they are currently spending $3000 on their alternative, and they are still interested.
This is one of our customer segments, the thing is, many of these customers would likely only have paid $150 on a per-use plan. But they want to pay more, and not have to think about per use.
The challenge for us, is our cost for each of their users is high, and as this is a new market, it is very difficult for any of us to forecast usage. We're learning.
Don't undersell yourself, and I've learned that focusing on the packaging is as important as the actual $$.
Also, how many people are charging the same amount in $ and €? We give the same dollar amount to both groups, don't undersell on exchange rate either (I don't think).
I've found that customers are over-optimistic about their own businesses and are happy to pay for higher user limits that they never use. You just need to give them the option.
>how many people are charging the same amount in $ and €?
I keep it simple and charge in US$, even though many of my customers are in the UK. US$ is the "global" currency, and everyone understands it.
There is a very classical paper "A Disneyland Dilemma: Two-Part Tariffs for a Mickey Mouse Monopoly" that discusses, amongst other things, two part "tariffs" (admission + ride) which allow "the sellers to capture part of the residual surplus through an appropriately chosen fixed fee."
Which is exactly what the Article has ended up rediscovering at the end.
Quite a few economists and companies have given this problem a lot of thought, so it might very beneficial to study the body of literature that developed over the decades.
A PDF of "A Disneyland Dilemma":
If you are writing more than just the link, it's common to use a zero-indexed footnote:
The pdf  was originally published by MIT press, and can be found online [.... pretend I wrote more prose]
the absolute optimum to capture maximum consumer surplus would be infinite-part pricing, i.e., charging each customer their maximum willingness-to-pay price. but it's very difficult, if not impossible, to determine that price in an efficient way.
why not three-part (or higher) pricing? because you increase the complexity of the buying decision without enough of a payout.
And essentially the only way to achieve the optimum (maximum price discrimination?) is to know that specific consumer's demand curve -- which is also the whole idea behind "contact us" pricing pages.
I also think there is a limit to how complicated you can make the payment system before the user just gets confused. So that definitely should be considered. But two-part seems to be a familiar model for most people.
For my company, we try to target our monthly pricing to be between 1-2% of what our estimated costumers revenue is for the same period.
This method only works if use of your software is directly tied to the production of their product. It falls apart if your software is merely ancillary.
Actually, he mentions that academics argue that 3-part tariffs may be the most optimal.
From his article:
"Linear Pricing (LP) - Each analytics event costs $0.10."
"2 Part Tariff (2PT) - The analytics software has a base platform fee of $10,000 and each analytics event processed by the system costs $0.10 more."
"3 Part Tariff (3PT) - Again, the software has a base platform fee but the fee is $25,000 because it includes the first 150k events are free. Each marginal event costs $0.15."
It can be a pain to implement "tariffs" on the billing system side, but it can be well worth it in the end. Props to you all at Canny for pushing through.
BTW, if anyone is interested in building tariff/metered billing into their product, you might want to check out Cheddar's Billing API:
Another learning is that some customers are just not meant for you.
UseResponse costs $15/month. And other SAAS products which are at the $50/month mark are products like Intercom (which actually is three products) and are further ahead in terms of more features and polish.
I just don't feel the value proposition is all that great. And for $600 (cost of a year) I could feasibly someone get offshore to replicate your product.
And I am literally right now looking for a product like yours.
As we mentioned in our blog post, we tried lower pricing and it didn't work well for us. Customers were less qualified and churn was much higher.
Anyway, I think I am going to tackle the issue from the other side though and go with ProductBoard. It's a product management tool with feedback on the side.
I'm always disappointed when I see SaaS where you have to upgrade to an "enterprise" account just to get reasonable security. Props to you and your team for not forcing customers into that dilemma!
Honestly single sign-on is just a no brainer MVP feature for Canny. Your users shouldn't have to make a separate account to give feedback for your product. That would be like Intercom making your users make a separate account to live chat...
How do different industry price things? Is there a book or other resources on the subject on how to price different items? Clothes, Disk washers, Food, Software, Services.. etc. Or Phones.
Because different industry and products have different way to do cost calculation, and different margins. Or depends on companies etc. Just wondering if i could learn more on the subject.
> While you’re making big changes, take care of your existing customers. If you’re raising prices, grandfather them to their current plan. If you’re lowering prices, give them some alternative options.
But, you weren't running A/B tests so all those pricing pages weren't active at the same time.
I think something like 'time since inception (months)' would be more insightful.
Ditto with 'Average Revenue Per Customer' & 'Churn'