Hacker News Reader

Comment by lonelappde | Hacker News Reader

That means the price is negotiable. Rich users pay more, poor users pay less, both users get value, producer makes a profit; everyone wins.

View on HN

If you're an inside salesperson, cold calling ought to be pretty straight forward:

Customer: Sorry, I just don't think it's worth the price...

Sales: Oh really? Because we've identified 42 critical vulnerabilities in your code base

Customer: Do you have an installment plan?

Sales: Oh really? Because we've identified 42 critical vulnerabilities in your code base

Customer: We know the software runs on java 7. We don't need to pay you 100k to find out.

What's the best way to put this politely from the seller's perspective lol. Do sales teams do background homework on clients' revenue and then come up with different numbers for the exact same offering?

It's one of the big reasons why I try to finalize contracts before announcing a round of funding. You'd be amazed at how much pricing for things jumps immediately after announcing that Series B.

Yes, that happens.

Sometimes it is also possible to brand the exact same service in different ways.

If you have a SaaS that is fully OSHA compliant on all tiers, it may be worth it to not mention the OSHA compliance on lower tiers, but only offer it on the Enterprise tier for example.

Sure, why not? Or they impute value from usage.

Cost based on usage seems very fair to me, but GP said "rich users pay more, poor users pay less," which seems to suggest that if Microsoft emailed me asking about a SaaS subscription for 1M req/day, I should quote them orders of magnitude more than a small startup asking for the same 1M req/day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com