In many categories, the incumbents have gone upstream, and their pricing is now aimed at the enterprise. They've left the SMB market behind. There's a huge opportunity in targeting SMBs/prosumers who can't afford enterprise prices.
-
Pokaż ten wątek
-
Justin Jackson podał/a dalej init1
I'd argue that most new businesses have to compete on price because they're... new and unproven.
You haven't earned the right to "charge more" yet.
You don't want to compete on price forever, but in the beginning, it's often necessary.https://twitter.com/N0RESP0NSE/status/1359226922593628162 …Justin Jackson dodał/a,
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 11 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
BTW – I'm not talking about charging $5/month when all your competitors are charging $99/month. I think
@crisp_im is a good example: they charge $99/month for their unlimited plan, which is significantly cheaper than what Intercom charges. More value, at a lower cost.
4 odpowiedzi 1 podany dalej 15 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
Justin Jackson podał/a dalej Pliny
Another example:
@endcrawl provides software that generates film credits. Their pricing starts at $499 per project. That might seem like a "high price," but they're still faster + cheaper than doing it the old way.https://twitter.com/iampliny/status/1359229092198043664 …Justin Jackson dodał/a,
Pliny @iamplinyW odpowiedzi do @mijustin @0xholman @endcrawlThat's about right. We 100x the delivery time of renders (video outputs) which is wildly useful since credits are revised a zillion times. Our main competition is designers/agencies (high-end services, but bad workflow) so we price right around the "bespoke services" bubble.1 odpowiedź 1 podany dalej 18 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
Even premium-priced upstarts end up being a "lower cost for better value" play. In WPengine's case, they were more expensive than Bluehost, but they dramatically reduced the amount of time + money a site owner had to spend on security and updates. (h/t
@asmartbear)1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 5 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
In the beginning, you have to prove yourself! Your product hasn't built any trust. There's no reason to market it as a "premium service at a premium price." Many of the luxury brands you know today had humble beginnings. Most folks have to start small. https://www.crfashionbook.com/fashion/a26934683/evolution-gucci-designer/ …pic.twitter.com/2ys6x2014r
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 10 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
Plus: many old incumbents have crusty, slow software (with bad UX). Enterprise customers have to put up with it, but SMBs want more: "They don't have the features I want." "The features I want are stuck in $999 enterprise plans." "This software is unusable and expensive."
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 13 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
As products move upmarket, they leave behind unserved gaps in the market. But those gaps often consist of SMBs who want: "The basics done well, at a more affordable rate."
3 odpowiedzi 1 podany dalej 10 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
W odpowiedzi do @mijustin
Actually most SMBs want DFY services at DIY prices.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych
Not sure what you mean by that?
-
-
W odpowiedzi do @mijustin
Meaning they’re not willing to pay what they should for the thing they want you/your product to do. DFY - done for you DIY - do it yourself
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @dohertyjf
Odd. That hasn’t been my experience. There are always problem customers, but many SMBs are great to work with.
0 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych
Koniec rozmowy
Nowa rozmowa -
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
building