So, far every article I've seen from uxmovement.com has anecdotal advice with no sources, and no numbers to back them up.<p>Also, when creating the tiered plans for your web-app, I highly recommend NOT having anything that is "unlimited" in any of your plans. It is very hard to go back and un-unlimit your plan. Don't leave it open-ended.<p>Sure, make the limits high on the top plan, hell make them higher than anyone could possibly need, but still have limits. If someone needs more than that, you can work something out. If nothing else, have a per-instance-pricing plan ($50/mo for 500 things + $0.05 per additional thing).
Is this actually from experience? Or is this simply cherry-picking from famous web apps?<p>If the author hasn't built a successful pricing page themselves, then this is just white noise. Best practices for this kind of thing seem to go in and out of style every 6 months.<p>Disclaimer: I have made 2 SaaS apps and the pricing page is the kind if thing where if you haven't done it before, your opinion about what color green works best etc has zero value.
I loved the post, but would be interesting to see some actual data behind these observations.<p>Some of these seemingly contradict each other: one "rule" claims that ascending order of prices is better, another claims the opposite.
Two issues:<p>1. There is no quantifiable data to backup the assertions. Does anyone have A/B test data to back any of the author's assumptions?<p>2. There is no discussion on how to structure pricing that scales on a specific metric e.g. users, storage space, number of uses etc.<p>The common approach is to lump all the plans into 3-4 buckets with the last bucket being an "unlimited" plan. Suffice to say, this approach may not be ideal in cases where users have widely differing requirements.<p>For example, imagine pricing a product based on impressions/page views. Buckets simply don't make sense.<p>I'm currently experimenting with a pricing table that allows buyers to CUSTOMIZE their plan from a traditional 3-4 plan table.<p>See <a href="http://www.trafficspaces.com/plans/" rel="nofollow">http://www.trafficspaces.com/plans/</a> for how I've done it. What do you think?
Pretty cool. And they're not too sketchy!<p>The only one I was put off by was #6, hiding your free plan. Although it certainly makes sense, I know I get easily pissed off by this sort of thing. If you follow the other rules, and put it off to the right, I think it'd be fine.<p>Also, if you have them sorted in descending order AND have a decoy, I feel like that could be offputting: the first price you see would be <i>huge</i>.
There was a good article I read a while back on how restaurants could improve their menus to increase revenues. I think a lot of similar things apply, and that article seemed to have the evidence to back up the ideas.<p>Unfortunately I cannot find the link, but one of the things I did remember was that customers spent more when prices were not preceded by the currency sign.
On the topic of UX but unrelated to pricing tables: I really like the tops of the social networking logos just above the comment form that pop out on hover. I'm not sure why I like them so much. But there's something about having an onslaught of social media logos encouraging you to share which bothers me and this bothers me less.
This seems very useful had not given much thought to pricing grids (easy oversight I guess). Though I don't know about hiding the free packages, if your not going to promote it why have it and surely a free customer is better than none. I Think this calls for some A/B testing.
this seemed very scammy and "customer hating / clueless corporate like". the opposite of the clue train. and when i see this kind of shit for real it pisses me off. sure if you want idiot customers who are tricked by simple psycology and you dont mind insulting eveyones intelligence, but really you should / could be better.