We still offer one solution to everyone, yet usage is very differentiated. We still price per seat and undermonetize heavy users. We’d like to explore value-based but we’re not sure how…
That’s the most common sentence I hear, and the most honest one. Pricing is never one problem. It’s a puzzle: strategy, segments, packaging, metric, price levels, all connected. Pull the wrong piece first and you break two others. Knowing where to start is the first decision. Let’s find yours together.
We know we’re underpricing but our focus was on acquisition. If we knew how to monetize better without hurting acquisition, we would.
That fear is healthy — and usually, you’re right. You can’t solve underpricing with a higher figure. Underpricing is not a number problem. It’s an offer that doesn’t let customers pay for what they value. Raising prices blindly is a gamble. Knowing where the value sits and adjusting your pricing accordingly is not. That’s the conversation we should start with.
Everyone agrees pricing needs to change. Founders, Sales, Product, Finance, and investors each have a different idea of how. But no one has the mandate to align them and lead the change.
Founders, Sales, Product, Finance, investors: five opinions, zero decisions. This is rarely about people. It’s about missing evidence and a missing mandate. Until someone aligns everyone around one strategy, every pricing discussion will restart from zero. That’s exactly where an outside view helps most.
Every quote starts from scratch and discounts depend on who is selling. Your unstructured pricing is not only hurting your profitability; it is slowing your sales down.
If every quote starts from scratch, your salespeople aren’t selling. They’re negotiating. It feels like a sales issue, but it’s almost always a structure issue: packaging, metric and discount rules that were never designed together. The problem is, it won’t fix itself as you grow… Fix pricing before it gets pricey.
Usage and delivery costs rise without revenue while the value created by AI remains poorly monetized.
You’re not alone: AI made almost every offer evolve, and almost nobody’s pricing followed. Usage grows, costs grow, revenue doesn’t. And there’s no universal playbook. Credits, seats, outcomes: the right model depends on where your value is actually created. That’s worth figuring out before your competitors do.
Current price points are based on individual opinions, competitor prices and margin goals. We do not know how to get willingness-to-pay evidence.
Most price points come from costs, competitors and a gut feeling. Sales conversations don’t give you enough insight either. Willingness to pay can be measured, but only with the right questions, asked the right way, in the right order. That’s the scientific approach Mida recommends… and it pays.
Different use cases and needs for predictability are currently forced into the same commercial logic, but we have not identified clear customer segments yet.
If you feel that, you’re probably right. Your customers have different needs, different budgets, different urgency. But segments aren’t personas, and a Good/Better/Best grid isn’t packaging. Getting this right reshapes your offer, your sales pitch and your roadmap. It deserves more than a quick fix.
The team anticipates customer migration, internal resistance and another project nobody has time to run.
I get it. Migration, internal resistance, another project nobody has time to run. But a wrong price never sends you an error message: it just quietly costs you, deal after deal. The longer you wait, the more customers you’ll have to migrate. Let’s talk about how to open the can, safely.