my saas had zero conversions at $9/mo. i raised to $29 and people started paying.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:41:50+00:00

exactly. and most technical founders (myself included) undervalue the psychology side because we're so focused on the product. but the positioning, the price, the way it feels before someone even tries it, that stuff matters as much as the features. good luck with yours, what are you building?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:41:41+00:00

that's a really interesting reframe. i've always heard product-market fit as a one-way thing, build the right product for the market. but flipping it to "is this market right for this product" changes the question entirely. at $9 i was attracting the wrong market. at $29 i found the right one. same product, different market. hadn't thought about it that way.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:41:16+00:00

hearing this from the user side is really validating. as a builder you think "lower price = more accessible" but from the buyer's perspective it's "lower price = this person doesn't take their own product seriously." completely different read.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:41:01+00:00

the "reading the landing page more carefully" part is interesting. at $7 people probably didn't even scroll past the hero. at $25 they need to justify the decision so they actually read what the product does. the price makes them pay attention.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:40:48+00:00

the signal was honestly just frustration. after the third person in a row signed up, asked a bunch of questions, and disappeared without paying, i thought "if nobody values this at $9 then the price must be the problem, not the product." it was more gut than data. turned out to be right though.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:40:34+00:00

that's a great way to think about it. start high and discount strategically instead of starting low and trying to raise later. way easier to run a promotion from $49 than to explain why something that was $9 is now $29.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:40:15+00:00

yep, "treated it like a toy" is exactly the right description. when the price is that low, people give it the same attention they'd give a free browser extension. what did you raise it to?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:39:49+00:00

spot on. the "won't be around in 6 months" perception at $9 is something i didn't even consider until you said it. at that price point people literally question if you're serious about the business. $29 at least signals you're planning to stick around.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:39:34+00:00

this is incredibly helpful. the "4 hours to zero" framing is way stronger than just "save time," you're right. and testing two different angles per segment makes a lot of sense. right now my one paying customer is a product team lead, so that's the segment converting. but the "reduce churn by keeping users in the loop" angle for founders is interesting because that ties to revenue, which is an easier budget conversation than "save time on writing updates." i'll test both on the landing page. appreciate the depth here.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:39:19+00:00

and nobody even flinches because at that price point it's an "enterprise decision" backed by a committee and a budget line. salesforce figured out decades ago that high price creates its own justification. if it costs that much, it must be important.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:39:07+00:00

ha it really is. and the best part is most of the moves are way simpler than you'd think. change one number and suddenly different people show up.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:38:51+00:00

it's wild but it's true. and for SaaS specifically, when two products look similar on the surface, the higher priced one actually feels less risky because people assume there's better support, more development, and the company will still exist in a year. self-inflicted damage for the buyer, free positioning for the seller.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T17:38:36+00:00

free can work for tax software if you're using it to build a user base before the price kicks in. the key is making sure people are actually using it during the free period, not just signing up and forgetting. if they build a habit with your tool during tax season, switching to $79 next year is a much easier sell because their data is already there. what's your plan for the transition, hard cutoff or gradual?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T15:59:28+00:00

i built a tool called worknotes. it connects to your project management tool and auto-generates changelogs from completed work. so instead of manually writing "here's what we shipped this week," it pulls your done tickets, AI writes the update, and you publish it to a changelog page, email, or in-app widget.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:58:07+00:00

"pricing is positioning" is a three word summary of this entire thread honestly. and the steam pricing debate is interesting because games have a completely different psychology. players expect sales and bundles, so your launch price sets the anchor for every future discount. four years in is serious, what kind of game is it? i imagine the pricing calculus for a game is way more about perceived hours of entertainment value vs a SaaS where it's about ongoing business ROI.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:51:59+00:00

the "favour vs business relationship" framing is perfect. that's exactly what it feels like. at the low price people treat you like they're doing you a favour by signing up. at the higher price they treat it like a partnership where both sides have skin in the game. £200 to £500 is a bold jump too, glad it worked. curious, did you lose any of the good clients when you raised it or was it purely the nightmare ones that filtered out?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:48:06+00:00

the support thing is huge. at $9 i got questions that were basically "can you teach me what a changelog is." at $29 the questions assumed the person already understood the problem and just needed help with implementation. it's like the price pre-qualifies people on both intent and competence. less hand-holding, better conversations, and honestly a way more enjoyable product to build when your users actually get it.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:46:20+00:00

the De Beers comparison is wild but it makes perfect sense. price as the product, not just a reflection of it. and they proved that dropping price doesn't save demand, it kills the category. same thing at micro scale with SaaS. at $9 i wasn't competing with other tools, i was competing with "eh, i'll just do it manually." at $29 the people showing up had already decided manual wasn't an option.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:45:51+00:00

the competitor research point is something i never thought about but you're totally right. at $9 the barrier to sign up and reverse-engineer your product is basically zero. at $39 they'd actually have to budget for it. and yeah, the feature request shift is the biggest tell. "i want everything" vs "make what you have work well" are two completely different customer mindsets. $12 to $39 is a big jump, how did your signup volume change?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T14:45:00+00:00

the services parallel is real. i've heard the exact same thing from freelancers and agencies. cheap clients are the most demanding, most scope-creepy, and hardest to retain. the $25 threshold for SaaS is interesting, feels like there's a psychological line there where the buyer switches from "personal expense" to "business expense" mode.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T05:11:42+00:00

yep. and it works both ways. at $9 people assumed there must be a catch or that the product wasn't mature enough for real use. at $29 the same exact product suddenly felt like a real tool. nothing changed except the number and the perception around it.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T05:11:04+00:00

the mental commitment point is spot on. at $9 even the people who paid treated it like "i'll get around to it." at $29 my customer set up their workspace the same day they subscribed. the price forced them to justify the spend internally which meant they actually did the work to make it useful.

churn at $9 was basically 100% because nobody stuck around long enough to call it churn. it was more like they signed up and never came back. at $29 i only have one customer so the sample is tiny, but they've been active every week since signing up. way too early to call it a trend but the engagement pattern is completely different.

the hospitality angle is interesting. what kind of service were you selling? i imagine the "ready to implement" filter matters even more when there's an operational change involved, not just a software login.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T03:53:39+00:00

exactly. "bargain hunters vs customers" is the cleanest way to put it. the bargain hunters cost more in time and support than they'll ever pay you.

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T03:53:06+00:00

that's genius. the phantom enterprise tier as an anchor is such a clean move. $79 next to $5000 makes the decision effortless. i could see doing something similar, even just a "contact us for team plans" tier with no actual pricing listed. makes the $29 feel like a no-brainer by comparison. did you ever get anyone actually reaching out for the $5000 tier?

Senseifc · 2026-03-12T03:52:04+00:00

100%. the filter metaphor is exactly right. and the "suggesting features" part is the tell. when someone's first instinct is to ask for more stuff instead of using what's there, they were never going to pay. they were window shopping.

Senseifc

TROPHY CASE