Hello HN,<p>Over at Runbook.io we are looking at changing our pricing model and could use the communities advice.<p>We are an open source project built via https://assembly.com; which means that after costs of doing business, any profit made is paid to the community that contributes code/design/everything.<p>Financials: https://assembly.com/runbook/financials<p>While we have a few paying users the $1 per monitor price tag doesn't seem to be enough to cover our costs long term, let alone enable royalties to be paid out to the contributing community.<p>So the question for the HN community is this, if we raised our price per monitor how much should we increase it too? The highest we have discussed is $9.99 per monitor per month. Would you pay that for our service? If not what would you pay?<p>We are also considering moving from a per monitor pricing structure to a tier based structure. Where you get x amount of monitors for y price.<p>So the second question regarding how to pay is this, should we keep it per monitor or move to a standard tiered based model?<p>Related links:
https://runbook.io
https://runbook.io/pages/pricing/
My off-the-cuff assessment is that tiered pricing will probably give you the most bang. This usually works better if you do it based on actual data of what your users do, rather than random comments from HN, but my guess is that you'll probably be able to segment into Hobbyists vs Small Businesses vs Big Fish without too much problem.<p>Following up with a number out thin air, I would say that $9.99 is sounds like a good ballpark for the lowest tier. Businesses should be willing to pay a large multiple of that (Think 10x and up) for any solution that solves a real problem for them, as long as you make the segmentation clear and market accordingly.<p>OTOH, If you are really married to "unit" pricing you can kind of keep it by giving each tier a fixed number of monitors/reactions plus the option of purchasing extra monitors/reactions at a fixed unit price (different per plan), but you should really look at actual usage data to figure out whether it's worth it. In my experience, simple tiered pricing works better.<p>Also. Completely unrelated to pricing but it made me cringe when I saw it: If I hit the call to action on the landing page I get to a form with a lot of empty space around it and no indication of what follows.
You should take advantage of that empty space to make clear what will happen to me if I fill out the form and hit the button. For bonus points you can point out some more benefits, or a testimonial that takes down a common objection to signing up, or whatever, but a simple bit of text saying "The next step will be like this" should make a measurable difference in conversions.<p>My email is in my profile if you want me to spout some more random unsolicited advice at you.
Here are a few things which come to mind when looking at your pricing:<p>* Your pro package is too cheap. If you're in the DevOps market space, I'm willing to bet that 99.99% of your potential customers would be as willing to spend $10 per month as $1 per month. If you can demonstrate a savings of one man-hour of labor per month, you could probably charge $100/month without too much difficulty.
* Your pro package is too expensive. As a recent guest to your site, the free and the pro plans look very similar in terms of benefits. Why should I go to the trouble of whipping out a credit card when I can be lazy and just use the free plan that looks almost as good? My guess is that you have a bunch of freeloaders who will never convert to paid either because they are cheap or they don't need any additional service.
* It's not clear what the benefit of your system is to your users. On the front page of your site, you should have a clear explanation of how a customer's life would be better if they gave money to you. You're assuming that your entire audience not only knows what IFTTT is, but you're also creating a dependency on IFTTT to explain the benefits of your own product.<p>As a first shot, I'd try to think of the types of users who would benefit from using your product.<p>You could tier by many different characteristics - response time, monitors, types of reactions, monitoring intervals - even access to https. If you can break down your potential customer groups by willingness and ability to pay, you'll have a better idea as to which characteristic(s) should change from tier to tier.<p>I have a free chapter up on customer value that you might help - <a href="http://taprun.com/pricing" rel="nofollow">http://taprun.com/pricing</a>
Firstly, I disagree with the <i>Assembly model</i>, but that is another discussion for another day.<p>Salesman rule for product pricing (something I need to adopt myself): price your product at a cost that is similar or cheaper to your competitors.<p>Go cheaper if you have less features, but keep adding more and you can possibly steal away customers from your more expensive competitors.<p>If you have no competitors, your client-base and their usage should've given you an indication of where to start pricing.<p>Companies pay ridiculous amounts for things as trivial as chatrooms, so if you're automating away DevOps/System-Administration, you can charge a decent chunk of change that will come cheaper than say $4,000 per month for a senior system administrator.<p>I've also heard of a theory where if a product is <i>too cheap</i>, some companies feel that it is a weaker/inferior product.<p>For any startup/side-project type person, create a special tier where you reel them in and hook them onto your services. Paying $25 per month to monitor servers 24/7 and avoid downtime[1] is an asset for 2/3-man teams.<p>I also agree with taprun about the free tier. Would you run RunBook on that free shared-webhosting site?<p>There's tons of people who would like things that aren't free to be given for free. This is called "free-riding" in economics and you are basically swallowing their costs. IMO, giving the source-code away for free is good enough.<p>Create a trial period and have a pay-only service.<p>You'll end up on-boarding shitty customers (which are probably at +10 to 1 of your paying ones).<p>[1]: Like everyone else, I don't actually know what your service provides (clearly). To me it seems like an automatic server-monitoring service that detects and tries to fix errors.
Somewhere in the range of $99-199 per month per server/host, with unlimited monitors on each server. This kind of tool is in a similar place market/value-wise as NewRelic, IMO, which has that kind of pricing.
This reminds me of the discussions between Tarsnap and Patio11 - basically, charge more and create tiered pricing. Even if the only difference between one of the tiers is having your phone number.<p>I will need 4 monitors when my project is complete and I would happily pay $49 per month for that peace of mind.