Madhavan Ramanujam - How to Price Products - [Invest Like the Best, REPLAY]

Transcript from https://podmenti.com/t/c41eeb71ae5c29ad

I know firsthand how complex the tech stack is for asset management firms.
And seemingly every new tool and data source makes the problem even worse, adding more complexity, more headcount, and more risk.
Ridge line offers a better way forward. One unified platform that automates away the complexity across portfolio accounting.
Reconciliation, reporting, trading, compliance, and more, all at scale.
Ridge line is revolutionizing investment management, helping ambitious firms scale faster.
Operate smarter and stay ahead of the curve.
See what Ridgeline can unlock for your firm. Schedule a demo at ridgeline.ai.
Hello and welcome everyone. I'm Patrick O'Shaughnessy and this is Invest Like the Best.
This show is an open ended exploration of markets, ideas, stories, and strategies that will help you better invest both your time and your money.
Invest Like the Best is part of the Colossus family of podcasts, and you can access all our podcasts, including edited transcripts, show notes, and other resources to keep learning at joincolosis.com
Mm.
Patrick O'Shaughnessy is the CEO of O'Shaughnessy Asset Management.
All opinions expressed by Patrick and podcast guests are solely their own opinions and do not reflect the opinion of O'Shaughnessy Asset Management.
This podcast is for informational purposes only, and should not be relied upon as a basis for investment decisions.
Clients of O'Shaughnessy Asset Management may maintain positions and the securities discussed in this podcast.
My guest today is Matavan Ramanajan.
Modavan quite literally wrote the book on how to price products. It's called Monetizing Innovations, and his concepts have been used by companies across the world like Porsche, Uber, LinkedIn, and Superhuman. Our conversation is a masterclass on pricing. We discuss common mistakes when pricing products, why you need to focus on benefits rather than features.
and how to pick the right monetization model.
Please enjoy my conversation with Mataban from Mana Job.
Mm-hmm.
So Madavan, I've loved reading your book.
years ago and then again in preparation for our conversation today.
For one major reason. And we'll talk a lot about that reason in a few minutes here. And we'll go all over the place and all the things you've studied in business.
But the one thing that you sort of blew my mind on with your book is
The importance of pricing, which is something that so many entrepreneurs out there struggle with.
And the order.
in which pricing should come in a product conversation. I think almost everyone puts it at the end.
Let's have an idea. Let's talk to customers. Let's design something. Let's build something and then let's figure out what to charge for it.
I'd love you to provide your
alternative perspective on that order of operations and why you arrived at a
radically different way.
of building products.
I think probably framing the problem at hand.
For many years
I was working as a pricing consultant, especially in Silicon Valley and
And I really witnessed how
Everyone was so obsessed on creating
Amazing new and innovations, but hardly paid attention to
how to monetize successfully, or do we even have a
Willingness to pay in the market.
Now we used to even get calls saying, Hey, I've built a new product.
We've been working on it for the last two years and we need a price.
And by the way, we needed it last week. And you couple all these reactions with the failure rate that you actually see in innovation, it's remarkably high. And when I took a step back and I kinda looked at it, I think the classic phrase that comes to mind is that these companies were
I would say simply spraying and praying and hoping that they can monetize and they can build products that people will eventually buy.
But the core issue here is
They were hoping because they truly didn't know. They built a product, slapped on a price and threw it in the market and hoped for the best.
I mean this had to change and
This is why I wrote monetizing innovation.
what we call a winning approach is to think pricing
Early.
And to really test for
Whether there's a product market pricing fit.
Before you go too far in the journey.
And the reason for this is
Inverting that mindset is critical because
When you're building something
as an entrepreneur as a company
You actually don't have a choice whether you'll have a pricing conversation with a customer. The only thing in your control is when you'll have it.
And we are advocating having that much earlier.
So that you can design the product around what customers need.
what they value and what they're willing to pay for
In a sense, know that you will monetize as opposed to hope that you would
Maybe you can bring this to life and make it tangible for us with an example because
It's hard for me to imagine having a price conversation before I have a product to show somebody.
Seems like
the impulse is build something, even if it's like a vaporware demo or something.
And be able to walk in the office and say, This is what we do and then maybe have a pricing conversation. But I think you think
pricing conversation should be even before
the design and building phase. So
How does one of these conversations unfold if there's nothing to show in the first place?
Yeah, probably I'll take a example or a story and we
Talk about this in the first chapter of the book.
It's a story from Porsche. In the early nineties they were actually
They're thinking of a innovative idea. They said, Okay
Should we build an SUV? But an SUV for a Porsche.
That just seemed to be a little bit more.
Off. You know what they did
was interesting. They went to the market
There's nothing
drawn in terms of a blueprint scratch or even a product, but they just went and tried to identify whether
There's a need for a Porsche SUV, and more importantly would someone pay for it.
Very high level.
Pleasant surprise they actually found that
People said, Yeah, Porsche SCV could make sense and I would pay for it. I mean, people who had probably moved on from Porsche because they had a family, et cetera, but then wanted to come back to the Porsche umbrella.
What happened next was super fascinating.
What they did is they came up with blueprint sketches and

having this conversation with customers trying to identify what do they need, what is their value in an SUV and are they willing to pay for it. They even did
what we call as car clinics, where they would build a prototype, full scale prototype.
Where they would actually bring in people
and let them ride the car around and not a single unit has been, let's say, manufacture or productized yet.
But it's still a prototype.
And then after that experience
they would have these kind of willingness to pay conversations.
Things like for instance a big cup holder.
probably which goes against the grain of most engineers, doesn't look very aesthetically appealing.
It's in the car because people said they need it, they value it and they're willing to pay for it.
I mean a six speed manual transmission?
No one needed that in an SUV that was out of the window.
So every
thing that went into the car was actually battle tested with customers to see if they needed their value. And more importantly,
Are they willing to pay for it?
This is a very different way of innovation as compared to like the age old approach has been always build a product, perfect it.
Our customers don't know what they want. Let's slap on a price and throw it in the market and hope for the best. Very different. But if you look at the output of this exercise also couldn't have been more different than traditional innovation processes. I mean this SUV was launched.
with the name of Cayenne, which we all know today.
Accounts for more than half of Porsche's profit.
and it's built in hundreds and thousands of units. One of the roaring successes in automotive history.
I think the key here is to have that conversation with
your customers early.
You just have it once. It's a bit of you have it over a period of time and sustaining. Like if you build a prototype
And you pitch the value and you pitch the benefits.
And if someone actually says they won't pay for it
Chances are they're not gonna pay for it when you build a nicer looking version.
And that's the point. So having the testing and learning.
much earlier. And if someone says no, they won't pay for it.
The most important question is to ask why.
And you start hearing all of these things to design your products around what
Drives customers' needs.
What do they value and what are they ultimately willing to pay for?
The folks at first round wrote a blog article which
They summarized the entire thesis of the book, Monetizing Innovation in four success words. They said price before product period.
What I like about that example is Porsche's not showing up saying
We'll build anything you want, what do you want?
They do have
An S U B in mind.
They're willing to build single prototypes.
to test reaction. You're not walking in with a white sheet of paper, like there's some opinion that they have.
But they're still
testing that willingness to pay very, very early on.
And I wanna make sure we highlight what is distinct about willingness to pay versus just positive feedback.
Because I think
lots of things, features and products or whatever people might react positively to.
But that's not the same as their willingness to pay. So I want to make sure I understand the difference.
And then I'll ask what it looks like to have a great willingness to pay conversation, like how do you actually structurally execute that strategy.
Most of the companies, at least in the tech space, would tell you they try to achieve a product market.
Fit.
And while that is good, it is not sufficient.
For instance, if someone comes and asks, Do you like the headset that you're wearing for this conversation?
Like I like it.
Do you like it at two hundred dollars, the whole conversation is different.
So if you didn't put pricing as part of your product market fit validation
Often you're hearing what you want to hear.
The idea is to get to a product market.
Pricing fit.
And try to truly understand
If at the end of the day someone will
pay for the innovation, as in do they truly value it? Because
I think it also comes down to like
How do we define price?
When we talk price,
Most people think of a dollar figure that's just a price point.
I think we need to
Educate people to think about price as a measure.
For instance, liter is a measure of volume.
Price is a measure of value.
When you think of it this way, is price really stands for
Do people want your product and how badly you want it? And
In a way at the easiest way to remember this
In Latin there's only one word for price and value. It's called pretentium.
And I think they figured this out long back. It's
Reflections of the same coin.
I love that idea that it is the same thing. And now I want to talk about how we can suss that out in a customer. There's lots of stages to this.
The first one that's kind of interesting to me is
How do you make sure you're talking to the right potential people in the first place?
one customer's value is maybe very different than another's
picking your customer becomes like a really important
part of the answers that you get back.
What are the best companies that you've seen do this?
Do
We'll get to the conversation in a minute, but before you even do that, you gotta pick the people.
How do you do that well?
The very first thing to do is to identify
What is the problem you're trying to solve and is there an unmet need?
And I think this is what you're validating with
your customers. If you just go and ask them
what is the solution or how should I build a product, you'll probably get garbage back. That's the job of a
entrepreneur or company. I think you're identifying problems, not solutions.
Keeping that in mind.

problems and unmet needs, likely it is actually going to be very different across your customer base.
So identifying
What pockets of customers are you building for becomes critical.
I've worked in most industry verticals and I've not seen
A single
Situation where
customer needs are homogenous. It's always heterogeneous, whether we like to accept it or not. I mean I'll take a very simple
Example like if you put
Water in a fountain it's free. You put it in a bottle it's two dollars. You put gas in it, it's two dollars fifty cents, throw it in a mini bar it's five dollars.
Same damn water.
At the end of the day, it's productised packaged differently because people have different needs. I mean, I might like to carry it around, I might be price conscious, I might be lazy and I want it in my mini bar or or I prefer gas or whatever.
So if you could
Identify even different needs with a basic thing like water.
Chances are for your products you should be able to do that. So
having these conversations with as many people as possible to identify what are those clusters of customers with common needs.
And this is what we call as a segment.
A segmentation should be based on what customers need, what they value, and what they're willing to pay for. And then you product ties to segments. This is what companies that say very successful actually do. Not build a product and then try to identify who's the decision maker and try to position your product to different segments. You've already lost the battle.
You need to be able to productize to segments. And then when you find these clusters customers who need something, and let's say that's a large market that you can capture, you can build the right product for
this particular audience. And that's how
I would go about it and
Identifying who to build for
What need are you solving?
What problem are you solving? And then you need to come up with a solution.
Once you come up with a solution.
Take the blueprint wireframe, go and pitch the benefits.
Not the features. Features is what you build. Benefits is what customers get.
And if you pitch the benefits, you're trying to see if their eyes light up.
And are they willing to pay for it?
And like I said, chances are if they're not
no matter what you do and put some perfume on this and make a better product, they're not gonna be able to do it.
And you can do this in stages. I mean you can do it in multiple stages and keep iterating your products around this kind of information. And that is the crux of
What we are preaching.
Can you put a little more description around this idea of productizing for a segment? So let's let's imagine a product, uh let's maybe we could stick with the Porsche or something.
You would think like, okay, there's one version of this product. I could highlight it in different ways, but do you actually mean build a slightly different product?
for each segment and maybe just describe that a little bit more because it sounds like kind of an unusual
Thing.
Yeah, the most common approach
Which is also the faulty approach.
Is to build a product.
I've even heard this phrase called we are building a one size fits all. I usually correct people saying one size fits none.
You're trying to build one and then try to position the same product to different segments.
That's the wrong strategy. Because in those kind of situations a segment is just purely based on
Who are we servicing? What is the persona? What are their behaviors and how do I position the products? But what is missing in this whole strategy is you truly don't know what different segments need.
What do they value and what are they willing to pay for?
So segmentation needs to be based on needs, value, and willingness to pay.
So that you can build the right product for a segment.
So that you can offer the right product at the right price.
And this is what I mean by productizing to a segment as opposed to positioning a product to different segments.
And in this case
When you scan the market, you will actually see that the needs actually differ or different
unmet needs actually exist. You need to find
Clusters of people who are actually willing to pay for things similarly, need certain things and have a willingness to pay. And that's what you're productizing towards.
And if you look at Porsche, for instance, they would have different classes of their own cars.
Why is that? Because they're actually servicing different segments. I mean it's the same thing
with Apple iPhone. If they had said
Let's keep it simple and just build one model. That would have never been a successful strategy, right? I mean, they wouldn't be the most
profitable company in the planet if they've done that. I mean if they said let's just build a ninety nine dollar iPhone and that's that
If you actually look at it, there's an iPhone from
two ninety nine all the way to one four nine nine.
In a way they're productized to a price point.
Or a segment.
They have not just priced their products.
To give you a more tangible example.
Remember the iPhone X was launching, it was thousand bucks.
I was like, Okay, and looked at it.
I was not willing to pay this, but there was another phone without all those retina features for like seven ninety nine. I'm like, I'm paying for that. So I belong to that segment. So there was already a product for that segment.
That is the key. If that product didn't exist.
I wouldn't have
probably purchase the phone at that point in time and then you're just building one product and hoping, but at that
Same to token.
If you have one price, you're either gonna be overpriced for some
or underpriced for others, you're never gonna get this right. So you're productizing to different willingness to pay or different segments in a sense.
If you go back to the beginning of the innovation life cycle, so
We're at the stage of the prototype SUV, let's call it.
Talk us through how to have one of these conversations with a prospective customer. What are the kinds of questions that you recommend?
Companies ask.
To make sure they're getting
An accurate measure.
Of some sort of price or of willingness to pay or a value or something.
I think this is the most critical and important step in the whole
process and we've actually dedicated a whole chapter in the book Monetizing Innovation, chapter four. It's called How to Have the Willingness to Pay Conversation.
If you go and ask a customer,
What should I charge for this product?
You'll get garbage back. That's your job. That's not your customer's job to solve your pricing strategy.
But there's some clever ways of asking this in such a way that you get some meaningful responses.
For instance.
One of the easiest things that
I remember a a founder actually did to find out their pricing strategy is
He kept doubling the price in every deal till someone laughed him out of the room.
Okay, he found that there was a threshold and he hit that and then he knew that that's where he needs to stabilize.
That's at the basic level, right? I mean just keep doubling till you hit the ceiling.
That's one way to have that conversation. Some other ways to have that conversation is
Put people in a
relative mindset. I mean tongue in cheek I say
People are absolutely meaningless but relatively super smart.
What I mean by this is if you go and ask someone how much should I charge, you'd get garbage.
But relatively speaking, people can make a very intelligent
an informed decision. For instance if I'm let's say I'm making a software product, SaaS product.
And I go and ask the
prospect that I'm trying to sell to and I say, Hey, do you have Salesforce installed in your install base? And say, Yes, I do.
Okay, if Salesforce was indexed at hundred in value.
What do you think we bring to the table for your business?
That's a question people can answer all day long.
Which is if they say it's seventy or eighty.
then that's how much you're off compared to like Salesforce. Similarly, if you say if Salesforce is indexed at hundred in price, where do you think we should be?
That's also a
answer that people can make more sense of. In fact you can bring that back into your negotiation strategies.
when you're selling this product again, saying, Hey, look, you're paying X for sales first. Typically this is a value. We are here and we can justify our price. And you can quickly justify the price that you're actually coming up with.
So these are kind of relative questions.
There are
More in depth ways of asking one of the
Probably
Most useful
Monday morning ways of actually asking this is to ask what I call as the acceptable expensive and prohibitively expensive question.
What this means is
Think about this.
You identify the problem and unmet need in the market.
You came up with a solution to actually
Address this unmet need.
You built a prototype, wireframe, product, whatever you want to call it, blueprint.
And then you pitch this to the customers, pitch the benefits, pitch the value.
And go through the same exercise you would go through.
After you launch the product, but before.
pitch the value. And then ask them what do you think is an acceptable price for this innovation.
Now we all know that people love to
global themselves, they would negotiate and they would give you an answer. Cloud that
And then ask them what do you think is an expensive price.
And then follow that with like what do you think is a prohibitively expensive price?
What we have seen across thousands of projects that we have done
in this space acceptable tends to be the price that
People not only love your product, but they also love your price.
If you're in some really
fast growth mode, you could keep it because it's a no brainer, no friction price, no one thinks about it.
the right price usually tends to be around the expensive price. This is the value price, as in what people will pay you for the value you bring to the table.
They would not necessarily be your best friends. They won't be enemies. It's a neutral reaction. It's like the value price.
Prohibitively expensive tends to be the price that they would actually laugh you out of the room.
And if you do this at scale, you can start seeing
What are the psychological thresholds in the
market. Is there a
Let's say forty nine dollars per month that I need to be at because once I cross fifty, the demand actually just drops.
you will be able to validate these kind of what we call as psychological thresholds and we write about this in the book.
And it's super important to know these things because if you don't, without knowing it
you could actually be losing a lot of demand.
when you could have been just a bit under the threshold and sort of
had a better pricing strategy.
Rahul Vora from Superhuman actually used this
Method after he read monetizing innovation. I think he talked in one of the podcasts. I think it was an A sixteen Z podcast that I heard that he actually used this and he that's how he priced superhuman.
Of course there are more
Advanced methods.
Which involve

actual purchasing decisions and seeing how they would react.
This is very akin to real life and then change the situation and then see how they would react again. So you're tapping into the mental models and rules that they're using to make decisions and infer what drove the decision making. We write about this also. But starting with
doubling your price all the way down to like purchase simulations or
Scenario
There are a range of ways to actually go about
the willingness to pay conversation. The key is to do it.
Sounds incredibly empirical.
Which makes it really, really appealing.
I wonder how
you've learned about the motivations of buyers. What are some heuristics for
How a buyer processes
Evaluation.
on the fly for something like a Porsche. What is going through the prospect's mind?
What is driving their feedback?
So the key thing is as a let's say seller of this information, you need to put the buyer in the same state of mind that you would.
If they had the product in front of them.

I mean as close as possible.
And so the buyer needs to be in that mindset of decision making.
Where they truly understand.
What does this product bring to the table?
What need is this product solving?
Hence
What benefit do I actually get?
Is that benefit tangible?
And then the natural
Question is
what portion of that benefit am I willing to give back to the seller?
I mean, you need to put them in that mindset. If I get a unlock in terms of efficiency, what am I actually willing to pay for it, for instance?
So the key is to
Pitch the product.
And the value and benefits.
As opposed to discuss features.
And
Hell.
Your bias.
What can they expect from the product and what
unmet need is the product solving. And then you need to put them in that mindset of
Okay, I need this product and it's more of a decision making buying
Mindset
Is how I would define it.
There's this great little phrase in the book.
When it comes to product configuration.
Which is leaders, fillers, and killers.
Can you talk about what those three things are as we start to move from how to have the conversation to actually arranging the product, whether it's for a segment or overall?
Let's say you're testing a whole bunch of benefits, then you need to
assemble these benefits or let's say even features that you're building into a product.
That's a packaging exercise. Or you might actually
Take multiple products and
Come up with a bundle of different products.
Either way, it is basically configuring what you're actually selling.
So the leader fillers and killers.
Sort of principle.
is useful in determining
What to productize, like how to configure your product.
The easiest way to understand this is
If you think about
Uh McDonald happy meal. Your burger is the leader product. That's what people are actually coming for. Your French fries and Cokes are the filler product.
If you put it in a bundle
More people would probably take French fries and coke if it's stall standalone.
Probably people are looking still for the leader product, which is the burger.
Killer products are the ones that you need to be careful about because if you put it in a bundle, it'll kill the bundle.
For instance if you

along with a French fries, Coke, and Burger is gonna kill the bundle. No one needs a double dose of caffeine, hopefully when they're having a burger. But there are people like me who disproportionately love to have coffee with a burger.
So what happens is the
Coffee is striped and soul stand alone.
At a higher
Price point because I'm actually willing to pay for
If you put this in a bundle, what's happening is it just depreciates the price point for everyone because majority of them won't pay for it. So you're actually selling it at a much lesser rate. So the idea is to take it.
And say okay, that's an add on.
How do you come up with a bundle or package which
has leaders and fillers, avoids the killers, and then you need to determine whether the killers can be standalone products.
Or simply stuff that should be
Not product per se.
What are some of the biggest mistakes?
or traps that you see companies fall into.
when running this process. So even if they're doing what you've said so far.
They're having the pricing conversation early.
They're thoughtful about segmentation and productizing for segments.
All the things we've talked about so far.
What are some of the big mistakes that still happen?
Let's assume that you had the conversations early, you focused on segmentation.
You had the right product.
One is
Thinking about
Pricing as just
How much to charge as opposed to how to charge.
What we tongue in cheek often say is how you charge is way more important than how much you charge. As in what is the
right pricing model or monetization model and keeping that
in mind.
And the other one I would say is
Talking
Features and not benefits.
If you don't speak the value of your product, people won't get it.
And you need to be able to speak benefits as opposed to
Talking features.
Let's take this in reverse order. Maybe give an example of
Or even a rule of thumb for what is a benefit versus a feature, like
How do I know that it's a benefit versus a feature or vice versa?
I can probably take an example to illustrate this and we
Discuss this.
Example also in the
book. I mean I'm sure you've probably heard of a company called Smug Mug
They used to have a
Pricing plan which
You needed to probably scroll down and actually see and it was uh all the features that were listed, everything that was actually engineered.
What they did is they didn't do any changes to the products, but they just simply changed the way
They communicated.
their products to customers. They actually started focusing on
Benefits.
And for them, let's say the benefit, let's say, was
the ability to sell photos online. That is a benefit. But there's probably
ten or fifteen features that actually need to be in place to enable that benefit.
Initially they used to talk about
All the ten or fifteen things.
But then once they started talking about benefits, the ability to sell or the ability to have personalization, this is the benefit.
It was double digit improvements in revenue, no changes in products.
Just the way you talk about
the product and the value. I mean, having that articulation becomes key and
One of my favorite examples of value communication also comes from Porsche. I think it was
When they were launching the take on, I think their CEO said something like
Take on is not one of
The
most affordable electric vehicles you can buy.
There was never Porsche's goal.
First and foremost, it is a Porsche.
Something like this is
dramatically resonating with their customer segments. Right. I mean, like how do you pitch the value fast?
And how do you talk about the benefits becomes key. And if you don't
Then you're left with features and then you leave the customers to interpret.
what benefit they're actually getting.
Ideally you would be able to also tie your pricing
strategy in terms of your pricing model
To the benefit that is being realized.
And that's part one of them is step.
Simple way to think about this, a benefit is what your product does for them and a feature is how they use your product to do it or something like that.
Like the one in the how.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, that's a good way to think about it. What did you build and how does that impact the customer?
If we go back to the how to charge your customer, I think in the book you highlight memory serves like five distinct
models for charging. Maybe you could just
Pick those off.
We don't have to go through each in detail, but
I would love to hear at a high level
how you see successful firms triangulate on
the way that they're gonna charge.
Some things are just obvious. For a burger, you're gonna charge for the burger. You're not gonna
probably not gonna charge like a monthly subscription, all you can eat to McDonald's or something.
Although maybe that's possible.
maybe just take the five off and then we can talk a little bit about why this is so important for success.
So we talk about
different pricing models and
The most common ones are
Should you have let's say something like a subscription model, which is more on a predictable basis, same price month over month, for instance.
Or should you actually be more on a pay as you go or usage based models? This is the second one. You're basically paying
upon consumption. And of course you can have a hybrid with a portion of it being in subscription, portion of it being in pay as you go.
Then you also have models like the dynamic pricing models.
How do you price in such a way that
It's an equilibrium price between supply and the demand side. How does it actually change over a period of time?
There's also models like for instance
completely being freemium. That's also a pricing model.
To what extent should you build a freemium and what is the difference between
Let's say a premium and a premium pricing strategy.
So there are various models to consider, but I think the
Key thing is not to
gravitate to one or the other just because someone else is doing it, but to truly identify what is the right pricing model.
and then sort of build around it and focus on the how you charge questions.
We even talk about
A interesting way of
quickly getting to the pricing model. I mean, we even do some experiments, like for instance, if you put someone in a
thought experiment and say, Okay, look
If you're selling an item for a hundred dollars.
If I charge you
Let's say
Ten percent.
Or if I charge you
Five dollars and five percent.
Or if I charge you ten dollars.
Are you indifferent among these or do you prefer one?
I mean everything that we learnt in school, mathematics, economic, human being.
rational stuff would say that I'm indifferent. I've done this experiment. I simplified it, but I've done this kind of experiment thousands of times. I've never seen the indifferent actually there's always a model that just makes intuitive sense for your customers.
And identifying that. And if you can tie it to the value being generated.
Nothing like it.
It's kind of another
version of the same thing you started with, which is the important thing is to have the conversation and have it in relative terms, not absolute terms. Is that kind of the basic sum up?
Yes, that is the basic sum up.
Uh and I think like I said, tying it to the value is
At the end of the day, if people can
understand why they are buying in a certain manner.
That actually is super important. Not just
Rushing to let's say subscription versus usage, but
Truly trying to understand what makes sense for your product and your business situation.
Do you find that most of the time
the value piece of all this.
boils down to the same few common denominators. Like one example would be
could sell you time, I could sell you money, I could sell you signaling value or something like there probably aren't that many core
motivations if you keep asking why. Do you find that that is true?
Yes, that is definitely true.
Time money is probably a great example. Are you able to do certain things faster?
compared to like let's say existing alternates, are you able to do it better?
That could be better in terms of let's say
starting as basic as better resolution to like a better way of approaching things and people actually relate to that.
And of course, is it saving some money and it's an efficient process, et cetera.
But then what is it? I mean the level two is probably important. The level one is probably these high level
Dimensions, but what exactly is that?
For instance, if I'm saving money, where is that coming from? Is it inventory reduction, for instance?
What service level can I actually achieve from that inventory reduction? What kind of pricing strategy can I have?
for a software that lets you reduce inventory but keep the same s customer service level.
What gains do customers have? Is that a problem?
Am I solving it? Is there a
economic value that is generated and what portion of that economic value can I capture?
So that's literally how this conversation goes. And as a rule of thumb, what we have seen is
You should be able to capture at least
twenty to twenty five percent of the economic value that you are actually bringing to the table.
This is a good range to be in because if you're around the fifty percent, most likely you're leaving space for someone to disrupt you.
If you're less than the twenty percent you're under monetizing. So at least twenty percent is a good rule of thumb.
of the economic value that you are generating for the customer. This could be time savings.
This could be efficiency gains, money.
Whatever it is.
Does that insight translate into net margins, operating margins, gross margins, some combination of them? Like it sounds like a margin insight. Which margin?
before I rush to like a margin framing, I would frame this as you're trying to
Align your price to the value.
That someone abscribes to the product.
And then you need to control your cost structure.
to like maximize your margin.
This is why you have to make a distinction between
Your pricing strategy and the market willingness to pay.
So everything that we have been talking about is the willingness to pay of the market.
That determines the price.
And of course your cost structures and how you can improve it.
will determine margin. So this is not a
Cost plus margin strategy.
That is famously called the cost plus pricing strategy. That is
usually very suboptimal. You need to be more value based pricing strategy, which is
By definition, deeps and bounds better.
What are some things that you tell
entrepreneurs as you're talking about pricing their product.
that tend to most surprise them.
I think it starts with
Even understanding that there is a science behind this
Because they all approach this as an art.
It's often
An afterthought, but it's also
Driven based on gut feeling.
to substantiate this and say no, there's actually a science behind measuring willingness to pay itself is a
revelation for many entrepreneurs. This is also why
I wrote the book.
to give back a bit of what we actually know, to educate people that there is a science and an art to pricing.
The second thing that probably
Surprises entrepreneurs, which you already talked about is
Having that conversation early and often.
And not postponing this to the very end.
Because most entrepreneurs
or companies, especially in the tech side.
are so fixated on the product that they are not thinking about
How to have a commercial conversation with the customers.
till the very end and by that time it's probably too late and we they might end up building
one of the four failure types that we talk about in the book on four monetizing innovation failure types.
The idea is to build the fifth category, which is called the breakthrough category.
For that you need to have these conversations early. That's probably also
Equally
revealing for entrepreneurs. The third one I would probably say is
Thinking about
What to build
And who are you building for? Because often
We think about
our customers and say we are the best proxy for our customers and start building something. And that's sometimes
Or probably most times
Not true.
So like thinking about segmentation and productizing to segments, I mean, which we just talked about.
is also a key
unlearning a bit of what they already are used to, which is build a product and then try to somehow sell it in the market as opposed to build the right product for the right segment.
Obviously everyone wants to avoid being one of those four failure types. At a high level, what are those?
those four most common categories of failure.
The first monetizing innovation failure type is what I call as a feature shock.
These are products where there's simply just too much going on. I mean, if you hear things like our customers don't know what they want, let's just back this in. Most likely you're building a feature shock. And it's just an excess. And at the end of the day,
It does not resonate with anyone in particular.
You've just thrown in the kitchen sink.
And you hope for the best.
Swiss Army knife. Exactly, right. I mean the idea is to probably productize into different segments as opposed to just throwing everything in. I mean
Happens in some of the
most successful companies of our times. I mean if you take the Amazon Firephone, I mean Amazon is ridiculously successful company of our times, but the Firephone
I mean, Market Watch actually documented all the plethora features that no one wanted.
And the phone started at one seventy nine dollars in six months it was ninety nine cents and they wrote off that entire business because
people were not willing to pay for stuff that was actually
Yeah.
They would say why am I paying for this?
The second one is probably
more prevalent in tech companies, it's called minivation.
So this failure type happens when the product or the company or the entrepreneur
Build the absolutely right product market fit product.
But they did not have the courage to charge the right price.
So we call that as a mini variation. To give you an example
One of the semiconductors here in the Bay Area
Their companies.
They came up with a
Groundbreaking
Revolutionary chip.
And this was just game changing. And there's this thing in semiconductors called Moore's Law, where every generation there's an expectation that the price would decrease because the farm factor is decreasing. So your cost to produce the goods is lesser.
But they knew that they had come up with something truly innovative. So they said, Let's undo Moors Law.
And the previous generation was sixty five cents. They said let's price it at eighty five cents.
And the product flew out of the shelf.
secret in the room was that everyone knew that
They could have charged more for instance.
They went and did a post modem two years after this product was launched.
what they found out was these consumer electronics companies that ended up using these semiconductor
Chips could actually charge.
Fifty dollars of premium.
From people like you and I simply because this chip wasn't side.
And when you look at eighty five cents for fifty dollars of economic value, that was completely unfair.
And in fact, most of them laughed saying you could have gone all the way to five dollars and it would have been just fine.
I mean you multiply that with the millions and billions of these chips that were actually sold.
How much money was left on the table?
That is staggering.
That's a minivation where you had the
Absolutely right product market fit, solving the need.
But you just didn't have the courage to ask the right price.
That's a mini vision.
The third monetizing innovation failure type is what we call as hidden gems.
So these are products that kind of go against the grain of
your company, your your DNA, and you just don't want to productize this because you're worried about cannibalizing your existing business. So you just put it in a shelf and it's hidden. The famous example here is Kodak, which had the IP for digital photographs back in the nineteen seventies, but never productized because they're worried about cannibalizing the entire print business. But if you take
Someone like Autotrader dot com or Cars dot com. These are multi selled marketplaces where

Cars from dealers.
They were started by the Chicago or the Atlanta Daily Newspaper because they realized that ads were actually going to shift from newspapers to internet. So they built multi-sided marketplaces and
That's actually fascinating example of harnessing a hidden gem. Usually these hidden gems happen when there's an inflection point, like a software company going hardware, hardware to software, offline to online, or the other way around. So looking for them.
It's important if you don't go looking
It is mostly hidden.
And the last category of monetizing innovation failure probably
By far my favorite is what I call as undead.
So the
You can call them walking deads or whatever, right? These are like in classic science fiction, movie fashion, you should have never produced them because they come back to haunt you. Yeah. And they come in two varieties. They're either the wrong answer to the right question.
Or the answer to a question no one cares about.
Either way, producttizing it was a bad idea and you should have stopped it. I mean happens
All the time.
And again even in
Some of the most successful companies. If I take Google, for instance.
Super successful company.
The Google Glass Initiative.

Dead on arrival in two months, right? I mean, I'm not going to be able
priced at fifteen hundred. The paparazzi wore it for two months and it sunseted the product. We actually wrote in Monetizing Innovation that
better strategy would have been to actually take
segments that are willing to pay for this and productize and perfect the product before going consumer, like the B2B segments.
For instance if I was a
technician and I could have my hands free when I'm doing a repair job, or if I could have my hands free when I'm a surgeon and I'm doing a surgery, there's clearly a willingness to pay for these kind of use cases. And how can I productize to these use cases and build a glass would have been a better strategy. This is productizing to the segment that we talked about.
Not just
building a product and hoping to position to different segments.
We haven't talked at all about the companies and how they look behind some of these success stories.
Who is it that tends to be doing this work? Is it the CEO of the company? Is it someone else? And is there anything you've noticed about
the way organizations work or are structured that
either leads them to be more or less prone to doing this kind of work well.
We run the world's largest pricing study every other year. I mean, as part of
our work at Simon Kutcher.
Which is where I
Spend my time.
Would be
Found is that
Seventy two percent of innovations fail to monetize.
But then the clear question is what do these twenty eight percent do?
And there are only two success criteria that actually
is relevant for these companies. One is the price before product, which we have discussed.
The second one is sea level involvement.
As in a CEO.
Founder.
Or uh at least a C level involvement.
When it comes to topics around monetization.
growth or monetizing innovation.
And we were able to benchmark that companies that had this involvement
But thirty five percent better than companies that did not in all kinds of KPS.
And to me
Pricing, monetization, growth.
Especially I mean you think of it as a growth as a topic.
Is a hundred percent CEO topic.
And in the book Monetizing Innovation, every chapter
We end the book with what questions a CEO must ask.
in let's say meetings. This does not mean that the CEO should rush and, you know, roll up their sleeves and start setting price books. That's not what we're talking about. But it's about setting the right culture, the right tone.
Asking the right questions.
So that you build a culture around profitable growth.
And not just growth at all, sick.
I love the idea of senior involvement. Seems to be the answer to a lot of problems in companies lack of focus.
This sort of thing.
When you see someone that's doing this well
And they're especially trying to choose
how to deliver the pricing. So the models you mentioned
pay as you go, or usage pay, subscription, et cetera.
Do you find that there are good rules that these leaders can use?
Like heuristics almost.
To have a general sense.
Beyond just asking like which way would you prefer to pay us? Because sometimes usage base just may not work for the economics of the business.
Might work really well from a revenue standpoint, but have some
cost problem or vice versa.
Any heuristics you've developed for knowing
which path to guide people down around how to charge.
Yeah, absolutely. I think let's maybe keep the focus on subscription versus usage based models because I think those are the
Ones that are commonly used and also.
commonly misused. There are certain situations under which
a subscription model could make sense in a certain situation under which
A usage based model might make sense.
When you think about subscription
subscription models or how to charge based on subscriptions
It totally makes sense when customers let's say
demand predictable bills as in they want things to be predictable.
And hence you are by definition tied to subscription.
Or it could also make sense when
Let's say the usage is similar month over month.
For instance, if you're ordering tide pots, it's not like suddenly you start washing more clothes.
In May compared to like June.
It's kind of predictable.
So a subscription would actually make sense because the usage is similar month over month.
Or it could also make sense when
Usage is uh highly variable.
Because if you don't have a subscription and you have a usage based model, your pricing is gonna fluctuate too much month over month.
So then having a
subscription is probably a better customer friendly model as opposed to giving a heartburn every other month.
So to speak.
Or it could also make sense when
The
Usage is intermittent.
But the value delivered is ongoing.
So the easy example here is if you take someone like Lifelock, for instance, in a identity theft protection product.
There is a value that's ongoing because they're actually giving you peace of mind.

is very intermittent. It only happened once when your identity is actually compromised.
If you start saying, Okay, I'm gonna price based on
at that moment on usage, if your identity got compromised, that's the worst pricing model you can actually have, right? I mean, a subscription makes
Total sense because you're paying for
Peace of mind.
The usage is intermittent or episodic, but the value delivered is ongoing.
And the last probably
Way a subscription could make sense is when simplifying the conversation.
is to your advantage. For instance if you look at
The famous example of Netflix versus Blockbuster. They simplified the conversation. There was to the advantage and it just made sense.
because people had all kinds of reactions to blockbuster's pricing model back in the day.
If you think of pay as you go, when does that make sense? I mean it makes sense when
First of all
you have a situation where people want to commit less
And it's a low commit, less friction kind of model, makes it easier for users to onboard.
So the AWS model is a good one. I mean you don't have to plunk in a lot of money for infrastructure and server needs, but you're actually paying
in chunks as you actually consume. So that in those kind of situations it makes sense.
Or it could also make sense when
Customers demand transparency and fairness.
I think this is an absolute distinction that people should keep in mind because transparency and fairness has nothing to do with being predictable.
Most people confuse this. They would say, Oh, I'm predictable. Why? Because I want to be fair to the customer. No, that's actually completely different.
Transparency and fairness is typically linked to usage.
And to the value that you deliver.
Am I paying the fair price for the value realized? That's how you should think about fairness.
For instance.
If you don't use a subscription for a few months
Is it fair to charge the customer for those months?
That's fairness.
So we should not mix
Fairness and transparency with being predictable. Those are very different things.
A few more situations I would say.
If your usage is
intermittent or episodic and the value delivered is also episodic and not ongoing. So it's a bit
of a different case than the life lock example, which means that
It's like booking a flight.
Or you want to go to a movie.
You call the McDonald's example. You go there, you have a transaction. Of course, you can think of a subscription for some users, but for most users.
the usage is intermittent or episodic and the value delivered is also episodic and it's not an ongoing value delivery.
That's when a pay as you go can help.
Also helps when the underlying costs
which scale with usage. I think AWS is a good example. There's a cost to infrastructure that highly scales with usage. So
If you don't have that and you just have a subscription with more usage
Someone might actually be
the negative margin customer for you, but the alternate to have a pay as you go model would make sense because then
As much as you're using, you're also like kind of paying
No other
Fundamental.

Many companies struggle with this.
You need to have a metric that
You and your customers clearly agree to and there is attribution.
Not just rushing to
Mm.
model based on usage, but you need to be able to track this. You need to be able to measure according to this metric. You need to be able to show
Value delivered according to this metric.
And that is also important. And often that does not exist in many SaaS products. And if you're not very
clear about attribution on where you're actually
That'll bring the value, but you just know it at a high level.
Maybe the easiest strategy to be is on a
Subscription.
Model rather than pay as you go.
It's a fascinating set of ideas.
Like you said, different heuristics, different situations under which one or the other
Good work.
I love three dimensional plotting of a business of
Frequency of usage, frequency of value delivery, and the cost of value delivery.
You could kinda put all three of those together and plot businesses in in that space.
And see fascinating.
results is definitely an exercise I'm gonna start doing and it makes a lot of sense. Twilio and software
They have a very high cost.
They have low gross margins relative to most software. And same with AWS. The usage based model jumps off the page.
I love it. I think it's a fantastic way of thinking through the problem.
As you were talking, it brought to mind another question, which is
The
behavior changes or the things you've learned as the absolute price.
goes up and down. I saw something interesting recently, which was that
For something that's very high priced.
This was software centric, but I guess it could apply everywhere.
It almost
demands that you have to educate
The customer.
And if something's very low priced.
You better not have to educate the customer. It's just not gonna work. It has to be incredibly simple and intuitive to use.
Have you found anything like that in your exploration of the absolute price curve that
monetizing something at a million dollars a user is
Very different than ten dollars a user and points of interest in between.
Yeah, I think
First of all
Price needs to be a measure of value, like we discussed. And often people use
Pricing as a cue towards
Is the product actually good or is it valuable?
So we have to keep that in mind because there's a behavioral compliment. I mean, if you walk into a
That's a safe way and you see a
$10 wine and a hundred dollar wine chance, uh, you would say the hundred dollar wine is better because most people would probably say that with higher prices better quality, et cetera.
But then on a blind test to actually fail it completely.
then you think about
higher price that also signals
High quality.
in some way, shape, or form. So if your product is
Let's say emphasizes quality or
Like iPhone is a good example.
when they came out, it was emphasizing quality, brand, et cetera. So then having a low price for those kind of products would actually be counterintuitive. It will actually work against you.
Because you didn't emphasize what people should learn about your products.
And pricing is how people learn about your products. If it is a low price product
Often.
You probably need to have land and expand where you're probably acquiring people on a low price products, but then you have something else to upsell them.
over a period of time. So those product need to have pricing that just makes
Like you said, intuitive sense and
It's a no brainer price. And often
It's the acceptable pricing that we talked about rather than even the expensive price, but a product that just
Brings people into the ecosystem and then you can
monetize more as and when their needs
As and when the customer needs actually increase.
I wouldn't oversimplify it to saying that
If your pricing is low, you don't need to educate and if your pricing is high you need to educate. I would probably
correct that's to say it's your job to educate your customers as to
what you're charging based on the value that you deliver. I mean you need to educate people on value no matter what.
And as a consequence
Defend your pricing strategy and your price integrity.
If you think about the thousands of episodes of this that you've seen firsthand.
Is there a pricing genius?
a person out there that most pops to mind. Like when I say pricing genius, does any one person come to mind?
Yes.
Steve Jobs was a pricing genius.
When most people think about Steve Jobs, they think about a product genius.
In fact I even get a question sometimes saying
Yeah, you talk about
Willingness to pay, market validation, customers, everything else, but
Famously, Steve Jobs said
I don't need to ask customers anything and I would just come up with stuff.
To me
Let's say most misunderstood concepts. This is just according to me, right? I think the lazy approach is to say
Steve Jobs didn't test with customers and I don't need to
But if you look deeper, I think what he was trying to say is that it's your job as an entrepreneur to come up with a solution to a problem. And there is no point
in asking a customers to dictate that. Similarly there's no point
And asking customers.
What should I build or what should I charge for this product? You'll get garbage back.
The idea is to identify these problems and unmet needs.
And then solutioniz yourself.
And then with prototypes try to understand is there a willingness to pay and would markets actually pay for it?
If you look at
Apple or what Steve Jobs did.
He just didn't launch a product, but he actually had a
Clear pricing strategy in mind.
When you think about let's say the iPhone.
came up at a very high price and there was a skimming strategy, which we talk about in the book.
launch the product at a high price and over a period of time the price is reduced, more generations actually come out. It's actually built to like different segments. Like I said, there's a price, there's an iPhone at two nine nine, three nine nine, all the way to one four nine nine.
So they didn't even price the product. They productised to different price points of willingness to pay.
Then there is also the emphasis on what type of pricing model might make sense. How to
educate customers on the value of these products, the behavioral pricing tactics, everything that we talk about in the book has been emphasized in the launch strategies. I mean if if Steve had been sitting around a room and said, let's price this product at ninety nine and we just need one version, we need to get growth.
That would be the absolutely wrong thing that they would have done. I mean, not to say
they wouldn't have been probably successful, but they wouldn't have been successful to the scale that they are, which is being the most profitable company on the planet.
I consider Steve Jobs as
a pricing genius, not just as a product genius. And I think the most misunderstood concept is that he's just a product genius.

I actually wanted to title the chapter as
I haven't said this before, but I wanted to title the chapter as You're Not Steve Jobs.
And the editor thought it was too provocative.
So we actually toned it down to why good people get it wrong.
Mm.
Same concept. Less memorable.
You mentioned in the book that you have these questions that leaders can and should ask.
as a result of the ideas in the chapter.
If it was your job to boil everything down to a single question and you knew that tomorrow every business leader was going to ask themselves
A single question.
What question would you pick?
I would probably
Us
Simple question. How do you know that our customers would pay for this innovation?
And that will probably lead to a very good discussion.
How do you truly know?
This has been one of my favorite books on this topic.
It can be an intimidating
Topic.
Like I said at the beginning, it's certainly one that comes up all the time.
working with entrepreneurs trying to figure out this problem. I think the refreshing thing about your book and this conversation is that it is approachable.
It requires a lot of work. You have to go do it.
That's the most important thing, but there are strategies for doing it. And I think we've talked a lot about some of the best ones today. And I really appreciate your time.
I ask everyone that I talk to the same traditional closing question. What is the kindest thing that anyone's ever done for you?
I would probably say that I'm
Blessed to be surrounded by some amazing people both in my
personal life and my professional life.
who have been super kind and supportive and I wouldn't be here without them.
But I think for the podcast maybe I'll keep my answer
to like a business context, a professional context, if you will. I think many, many people have taken a bet
on me earlier in my career have given a
Helping hand.

Kind and supportive.
But one example that comes to mind.
is Duncan Robertson, who was actually the CFO of Open Table.

at that time and I worked with Open Table many, many years ago, like probably ten years ago or something, as a pricing consultant.
And he was very impressed with the work and
Out of his own accord.
He came and said,
Do you want to meet Bill Gurley and discuss the outputs of your work?
And I was like hiding my excitement. I was like, sure, but I was like internally, hell yes, I mean that would be awesome.
And he introduced me to Bill and Bill was on the board of Open Table back then.
And he did this out of his own
Kindness.
I met Bill.
We have stayed in touch over the last decade.
And Bill has been incredibly supportive.
of me and a big proponent of the work that I do.
I can confidently say that one hundred percent.
I would not be here today without
support from folks like Duncan and Bill. I can't thank them enough for their kindness and support, but there are many, many more examples, but this particular one probably stands out to me.
Well, thank you so much, Bill Gurley, definitely a good friend of the podcast. I think he's actually our most frequent guest at this point, which makes that a fun closing answer. Thank you, Maravan, so much for your time.
Thanks, Patrick.
If you enjoyed this episode, check out Join Colossus.com.
There you'll find every episode of this podcast complete with transcripts, show notes, and resources to keep learning.
You can also sign up for our newsletter, Colossus Weekly, where we condense episodes to the big ideas, quotations, and more, as well as share the best content we find on the internet every week.