your low price is be scaring customers away
This is a random post, but I a nerd that likes finance (I will link up a reaserch paper Price-perceived Quality Relationship) on the side, and I saw a question on a marketing subreddit recently that was basically:
Brand A sells a product for $30 and does a ton of sales.
Brand B sells almost the exact same product for $5 and barely sells anything.
So… why broski?
Because price is not just price, price is a signal. When something costs $30, people might think:
- that's decent.
- they must have reviews
- if people are buying it at this price, maybe there is something here
When the same thing costs $5, people don’t always think that's a great deal, very often they think:
- what’s wrong with it
- is this fake
- will this arrive
That is the funny part about pricing being cheaper does not automatically make you more attractive.
Sometimes it makes you less trusted.
There is actual research behind this. Consumers often use price as a quality signal, especially when they do not know the brand well.
Higher price can make a product feel safer, more premium, or more reliable. Qucik example, Ferraris. Nice expensive, but if you look at the welds quality, you will be shocked.
Too low of a price can increase perceived risk.
This is also why pricing pages usually have three options, not because SaaS founders are spiritually attached to columns, It is because the middle option often feels like the reasonable one. Safe one.
Cheap option: “probably missing something.”
Expensive option: “nu-nuh"
Middle option: “Fine, this feels normal.”
And this is where a lot of businesses get pricing wrong, especially ones that come up from poor areas, they think about making things cheaper instead of asking sth like
How do I make this feel like the obvious choice?
In the Brand A vs Brand B example, Brand B might not need to go from $5 to $4, It might need to stop looking like the suspicious option.
A smarter move could be creating a middle-positioned offer, which I suggested.
For example:
$5 for basic
$20 main offer / best value
$50 premium / exists partly to anchor the rest
Now the $20 option feels much more reasonable, not because the product magically changed overnight but because the buying context changed. People do not evaluate prices in isolation ,they compare, they look for the safest decision.
And very often, the safest decision is not the cheapest one, that is the part many early founders miss.
Price is not only about affordability.
It is about trust, positioning, risk, and giving the customer a story they can justify in their own head.
So if nobody is buying your cheap offer, the answer is not to lower it but to raise the trust
here is the link to the paper that explains things in detail on reaserchgate and... you can stop reading here but if you are interested in the plug
________________________________________________________________
This is one of the papers I read before changing prices on bundle.social to flat pricing (real sh**) and no connected account limits, because a lot of companies quietly turn pricing into a tax on your growth. More customers, more accounts, more workspaces? Congrats, your bill starts doing parkour.
We wanted the opposite.
If you are building a SaaS product, AI tool, agency workflow, or internal platform that needs social media publishing, scheduling, analytics, media uploads, and post history, your pricing should not punish you for getting more users.
69 > 67