5 Critical Questions to Ask Your Customers When Developing a Pricing Strategy

Annika Li • Jun 21, 2024

Author

Annika Li

Associate

Read Bio

In the dynamic landscape of B2B SaaS, understanding customer needs and preferences is paramount to success. To highlight this, we’ve compiled the top 5 questions that every B2B SaaS company should ask their customers to develop an effective pricing and monetization strategy. While new, prospective customers are certainly important, some of the best insight can come from current customers that know your products inside out. These are the pivotal questions we ask in customer interviews during our engagements with high-growth companies at Monevate. 



Question 1: What drove your organization to seek a solution? 


Understanding the motivations behind a customer's decision to seek out a solution identifies the specific problems customers are trying to solve and reveals what they value most. This ensures that your pricing strategy reflects the benefits customers derive from your solution, increasing its perceived value. By identifying specific pain points or challenges, SaaS companies can tailor offerings and marketing to directly address customer needs, deliver maximum value, and command a higher willingness-to-pay. 


Question 2: What key attributes do you look for and how do vendors compare? 


Buying attributes are the criteria that customers use to evaluate solutions when assessing vendors. Commonly cited attributes include ease of use, scalability, and quality. Customers want their solution to be user friendly, able to grow with their needs, and reliable. These examples can seem vague because key attributes are typically industry specific and nuanced based on the use case. 


By asking customers what key attributes they look for, you gain insight into what features they prioritize and value most. This understanding allows you to align your pricing strategy with the features that customers are most willing to pay for. Understanding how customers perceive your products relative to others in the market allows you to leverage your strengths and potentially justify higher pricing in those areas. Whether it is specific product features, pricing flexibility, or level of support, aligning offerings with customer expectations allows you to craft your value proposition around what matters most and make informed decisions that resonate with your customers. 


Question 3: What do you like or dislike about your solution’s packaging and bundling options? 


Packaging structure refers to how the product is broken up into separate purchasable units and reflects how customers value distinct functionality within the product. Options include a monolithic, tiered, and modular structure. Monolithic offerings suit startups that have one simple product. As a product evolves and becomes more feature differentiated, a tiered structure may help new customers grow into the product. As you and your customers grow, and you build new products to address their additional needs, a modular structure offers greater flexibility to meet diverse customer requirements. This packaging structure describes how products are organized on the back end. 


Customer purchasing preferences are also important to consider in packaging. Some buyers want choice, while others prefer to be told what they need. If you have customers at both ends of the spectrum, an a-la-carte packaging structure can appeal to both. Customers can choose the specific modules they need, or sales reps can present a bundled solution. 


For multi-product companies, creating bundles on the front-end with products that are most commonly purchased together provides a simple way to sell to customers that prefer solutions. Bundles can be tailored to different customer personas and use cases to streamline selling, while the back-end packaging maintains efficient SKU management. Packaging and bundling enable SaaS companies to create solutions for different customer segments, satisfy various buyer preferences, and establish the foundation for price architecture. 


Question 4: What do you like or dislike about your solution’s price architecture? 


Price architecture consists of two components: a price metric and the method by which price scales. The metric is used to scale the price of packages. Customers seek a metric that is easy to understand, perceived as fair, and linked to value. It is important that the value customers associate with the metric increases as customers purchase more. Predictability is also important – customers want to be able to gauge their expenditure based on this metric and have control over adjusting their usage accordingly. In B2B SaaS, we commonly see user-based pricing and consumption-based pricing. 


This metric can scale in a variety of ways, from a linear model that offers the most variability to a flat fee that offers the most predictability. Additional options include a fixed + linear model, where a portion of the fee is fixed while a smaller per user amount—if the metric is users—is also charged, and a sliding scale, where the price per additional user decreases at set breakage points. Diving into customer perspectives on price architecture shines light on their willingness-to-pay and how they perceive value. The goal is to best meet your customers’ preferences while scaling in a way that makes sense for your business. 

 

Question 5: What Are Your Price Sensitivities and Willingness-to-Pay Thresholds? 


Exploring customers' price sensitivities and willingness-to-pay thresholds provides valuable insights into pricing elasticity and market positioning. Willingness-to-pay gauges what price ranges are acceptable for customers, and we utilize the Van Westendorp method that asks customers to provide four price levels: 


  1. Too Cheap: What is the price below which you would question the quality of the product? 
  2. Inexpensive: What is the price at which you would consider the product to be a “bargain”? 
  3. Expensive: What is the price at which you would consider the product to be expensive, but you would still consider purchasing the product? 
  4. Too expensive: What is the price above which you would no longer consider buying the product because it is too expensive? 

 

By asking this set of questions, you obtain not just one price, but a range of what customers are willing to pay, helping you identify your optimal price. While there is a risk that existing customers might “low ball” their responses, the information remains valuable, especially if the bias is considered. Low balled numbers are also not guaranteed—in some cases, we have seen customers love the product, view it as underpriced, and respond with higher than current price levels. These responses are just one of several data sources used to curate prices. By gauging customers’ perception of value and price thresholds, SaaS companies can fine-tune pricing strategies to strike the right balance between affordability and profitability. 

 

At Monevate, we ask these five questions during the market research phase of our engagements to test out hypotheses before building the pricing strategy. Using these questions as a framework to run your own market study on new or existing products can provide invaluable insight for your monetization strategy. 


By asking the right questions and actively listening to customer feedback, you can tailor to customer preferences in an evolving market, optimize your pricing strategy to capture maximum value, and drive short and long-term growth in a sustainable manner. 


16 Feb, 2024
Only 40% of XaaS leaders felt they possessed practical pricing experience when tasked with developing their company’s pricing model, according to a recent survey. While lack of experience may seem daunting, it shouldn't deter you from spearheading a pricing transformation. However, it does introduce risk. To mitigate the potential pitfalls of pricing strategy design, we recommend cross-referencing against four crucial sources to establish a solid pricing foundation.
14 Feb, 2024
Navigating the intricate world of pricing in the SaaS industry is akin to embarking on a voyage through ever-changing seas. In this dynamic landscape, where adaptability and insight are paramount, a robust pricing support network becomes not just beneficial, but essential for personal and organizational growth. Here's why cultivating such a network can spell the difference between stagnation and success in your pricing strategies.
16 Oct, 2023
It was truly a Barbie summer! While they may not seem related, Barbie - both movie and doll - have a lot to teach us about the world of software pricing. First launched in 1959, Barbie has captured the imagination of children across the globe for 60 years – with a spectacular resurgence this summer. Mattel, the company behind Barbie, has used several growth and pricing strategies applicable to companies beyond the consumer goods space. Here are a few lessons we think are particularly relevant to the world of software pricing today, a complex market where the right strategy can make or break a new product.
By James Wilton 25 Apr, 2023
Telfar Clemens, the mind behind hit clothing brand Telfar, recently made headlines announcing a new ‘dynamic pricing’ strategy that flies in the face of traditional fashion pricing, charging less for more popular items. Should other businesses follow suit and discount more when demand is high? From the article, “there will be a dynamic pricing tool on the website that ensures the most popular, fastest-selling products are cheaper. The whole experience is designed to flip the script on the fashion industry, where brands tend to charge more for popular items. And it reinforces Clemens’ mission of making his products affordable, so they are accessible to anybody who wants them.” Different, eh? To be clear, this is dynamic pricing, but it’s unconventional dynamic pricing. A conventional dynamic pricing model for fashion would suggest that price would go up as demand goes up (so long as supply stayed consistent). Telfar are flipping it, and raising supply and lowering prices when the demand increases. This aligns with their operations – more demand means materials will be ordered in higher quantities. That unlocks volume discounts, so unit costs go down, and savings can be passed on to the customer. Neat. I want to like this because (a) it’s really interesting and potentially disruptive, and (b) it’s anchored around a social conscience, and there’s not enough of that in pricing. My problem with it? I just can’t see it working. What’s the problem? Luxury goods – and fashionable clothes are luxury goods to an extent – are an interesting case because they can have negative price elasticity. This means that demand increases as the price increases, because then the goods are seen as more exclusive and therefore more desirable. In other words, when fewer people can afford a specific garment, people want it more because now having it makes them “special.” A kind of wearable status symbol. So, given that frame, Telfar’s strategy is a bit counterintuitive. They want to reduce the price of popular items so more people can afford to buy them. It remains to be seen how that is going to mess with customers’ perception of the value of those garments. Can you imagine? “I bought this, but now everyone has it. And they paid less for it than me(!) So, do I still want it as much?” Unless you’re under the age of ten or trying to blend in, people tend not to want to wear exactly the same clothes as other people. It can be embarrassing to turn up to an event in the same outfit as someone else. The phrase “b*tch stole my look!” is going to be on everybody’s lips if that look is more available the more that other people “steal” it. At the opposite end of the spectrum, if I purchase something that nobody else does, under Telfar’s model I will pay a high price for it. But then I also know that nobody else wanted it, so do I get the same sense of esteem from being the sole purchaser? It’s not that only I could afford it, or that it was limited in quantity and I was one of the lucky ones that found it. It’s that only I wanted it. The only thing that says about me is that I have non-mainstream tastes. Some people might want that (e.g., to be cool, edgy and unconventional, perhaps), but then if everyone is looking for unique clothing items hoping that other people don’t like them, then many people will buy them for that reason. And then they’ll go down in price! Final thoughts I challenge Clemens’ notion that fashion pricing is illogical. It’s extremely logical, because it involves aligning pricing to broad perceptions of value. If you turn the model on its head, as in this case, you end up getting stuck odd circular arguments (as I did) because it pulls away from buyer behavior, and it’s illogical  It’s a great pricing strategy for grabbing attention, but I’d be surprised if it is successful. I’m all for fashion being unconventionally dynamic. But any dynamic pricing for fashion should remain conventional.
SHOW MORE
Share by: