A Pricing Strategy for Your SaaS Offering

Jan 7, 2008 by

Pricing strategy is a major component of any business, whether brick-and-mortar or bits-and-bytes. In addition to being an important strategy to hash out, it is also generally quite tricky to do correctly. Should pricing be value based or cost based? Should it focus on maximizing income per unit or volume? For all of the things our beloved SaaS delivery model does for us, it does not ease pricing strategy pains. I’d even venture to say that it makes pricing strategy even more complicated. After all, SaaS providers pride themselves in allowing tenants to pay a periodic base cost and tack on optional (and potentially intricately priced) bells and whistles. So how should a SaaS offering be priced? Clearly, this is something that should be considered on a case-by-case basis, however, I do feel there is a good framework to work from that focuses on boosting adoption rate and deferring creation of income and healthy margins to a path of least resistance.

From the provider’s standpoint, one of the beauties of SaaS is its predictability. Generally, this is discussed from the standpoint of revenue, but in reality, many things are measurable and predictable – including cost of service per user. Over time, it should be relatively easy for a provider to determine how much must be charged per some time period to recuperate this cost. From my point of view, a good framework is to build pricing with distinct cost based and value based components and focus this pricing strategy on supporting a sales strategy that relies on harvesting additional, high margin revenue from existing customers.

In business, you have two choices when it comes to generating revenue and income: sell to new customers and/or sell to existing customers. Selling to existing customers is generally easier than selling to new customers. Clearly, selling to new customers is the only way to grow revenue when existing customer sales have reached saturation (all those who would buy the finite set of additional existing products/services have bought them). In perpetual license models, high prices generally posed significant barriers to new customers whether it was directly because of the expense or indirectly because of things like requiring approval from purchasing, etc. SaaS has significantly reduced this barrier but brought its own problems: one single perpetual license sale generally equated to significant revenue while one single SaaS customer does not. Given the aforementioned, many providers strive to rapidly boost adoption to reach a pleasurable cash-flow position, and rightfully so.

The Framework

The above brief discussion defines certain requirements of a SaaS pricing strategy: boost adoption, cover costs, and generate an appropriate margin. Let’s tackle these one at a time:

  1. Boost Adoption: Adoption is generally boosted by lowering the barrier to acquire your SaaS offerings functionality. In the Web 2.0/consumer space, we’ve seen the freemium model work well. Freemium may or may not work in the enterprise space, but I’d recommend staying away from it. Instead, offer a free trial. Next, price the base plan(s) for your product (the product without additional, for-charge bells and whistles) at cost or only slightly above. This reduces adoption resistance (assuming all other things are equal, like your offering is actually good and people see a need for it) and should optimize your ability to bring on new customers. If you price too high (which may happen if you focused on value based pricing), you may create a significant adoption barrier. If pricing is too low, adoption would be boosted but at a loss.
  2. Cover Costs: Generally, you may not be interested in selling at a loss. As described in the ‘Boost Adoption’ point, price at cost to recoup. It would even be logical to price slightly above cost to absorb any sudden fluctuations. This is where predictability matters. You shouldn’t have too many operating surprises and given a good amount of time, your cost estimates should be quite accurate.
  3. Generate Healthy Margins and Profit: This is the bread and butter of the bottom line. My suggestion is generate profit by selling the bells and whistle components of your SaaS offering to existing customers. If you can use cost oriented pricing to boost adoption through a low base cost, you should have a healthy market of existing customers that pose significantly lower resistance to spending more money. This is particularly true if your bells and whistles are actually valuable, giving you good justification to charge a value oriented price.

This seems obvious at first, but I see companies charging high prices for base use of their applications. This may be severely limiting in nature. Instead, hook new customers to your base product and then offer high margin value once they’re using it. Focus on getting as many paying customers on your base product, since this validates that they’re willing to pay and that they value your product. Figure out how to profit from that base afterwards. As I mentioned, this may not apply in all cases, but it seems to be a good starting point. The goal is to exploit the ease at which people can sign-up for SaaS offerings and get as many tenants into your easier to harvest tenant corral as possible.

Do you agree with this type of pricing strategy, or do you feel that something like a strict value based price is wiser? We’d love to know what has worked for you or where you are feeling the worst pains.

read more

SaaS as Recurring Revenue Justification

Nov 20, 2007 by

One common misunderstanding (at least in my opinion) I find when discussing SaaS with people (particularly SaaS vendors) is that they make statements like “SaaS is nice for business because it’s recurring revenue.” Why is this a misunderstanding? Well, the way that statement is framed is that SaaS gives the SaaS provider the benefit of recurring revenue. Instead, the topic of recurring revenue and SaaS should be framed under recurring payment from the consumer in exchange for recurring, high quality delivery of software functionality. It makes the issue seem much less one-sided and is a more accurate representation of what happens (Yes, I have a penchant for definition nuances)

A recurring revenue model, however, is exactly that: a revenue model. Conceivably, I can sell someone on-premise software and ask to be paid $500 a month for the use of the software as long as it is being actively used. Conversely, I could have a SaaS offering and sell it on the basis of “Give me $50,000 and up to 6 users can use it forever.”  There is no direct coupling between the delivery model and the revenue model and with some craftiness I could use any combination of delivery and revenue model. In essence, I can achieve the benefits of stable, long term, and predictable recurring revenue or the benefit of large revenue influx and good periodic cash position via perpetual license sales without worrying myself about how software is delivered. Technically, we have the following four combinations:

  1. On-Premise, Perpetual License
  2. On-Premise, Recurring License
  3. As a Service, “Lifetime License” (a re-labeling of perpetual to fit the SaaS conceptual framework)
  4. As a Service, Recurring License

So what then, is so special about the coupling between the SaaS delivery model and the recurring revenue model? From the provider perspective, it makes the recurring revenue model an easy sell since its justified. It’s tough (although possible and has been done before) to sell an on-premise license on a recurring basis without any sort of continued, measurable participation from the ISV. The real importance of coupling SaaS with recurring revenue is actually from the consumption side of the equation. Those who use SaaS offerings get to pay as service is delivered, with the ability to discontinue use and mitigate losses when service becomes subpar or the offering no longer provides adequate return. Moreover, it also keeps providers honest and overtime keeps service quality levels high. This is a huge selling point that is not stressed enough and is significant in the SMB space since the cost associated with migrating to a new substitute SaaS offering is relatively minimal in nature and low in risk. When prospective or current SaaS providers discuss SaaS, stress should be put on the fact that “SaaS gives my customer the ability to pay as they receive service and have quality guarantees in place” rather than “I get recurring revenue” Customers don’t care if you get recurring revenue, but do care about the rest.

Do you think that SaaS is necessary justification for recurring revenue, or could recurring revene models be justified using “old” on-premise delivery/other delivery models? How important do you think “pay as service is delivered” is to SaaS customers?

 

read more