The author may not know it, but part of this article is describing something occasionally known as the judgement-action gap. It's a point in psychology/philosophy typically brought up in moral reasoning, specifically because there's very often a massive discrepancy between what people say they will do and what they end up doing in any moral situation.[1] This is no doubt true for saying they would pay X for Y.
I think the judgement-action gap is an extremely important thing to remember at all times, especially in the realms of business deals. If a commitment isn't on paper, it's not really a commitment. (Money counts as paper, too.)
Alas while I think the gap is a neat principle, I'd rather read an article just on that principle than one titled "How to price something" that culminates in the advice "make up a price, actually sell it and see." If that's all the advice you have, then even asking for people's opinions of what they'd pay for it is more useful than a 100% arbitrary number. It seems odd the article would offer no real solutions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey! Wait a minute!
I hate to be the typical HN cynic but the last line reveals that this is not an article at all but a thinly veiled advertisement.
While the article doesn't actually say how to effectively price something, I had no idea what Basecamp Breeze is and now I do. 37 signals blog, you've got us again![2]
[1] My favorite example of this, though a bit dour, is "the only moral abortion is my abortion", a long list of stories of people who are morally opposed to abortions, yet still getting them: http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-t...
[2] I'm always surprised that 37signals posts get upvoted extremely quickly, seemingly regardless of content. It's not a bad thing per se, just a surprising thing.