# Pricing Strategy > Pricing strategy - Skill: `matteotitta/pricing-strategy` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add matteotitta/pricing-strategy` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/matteotitta/pricing-strategy/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Marketing & Growth - Author: matteotitta (https://skillmd.com/u/matteotitta) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/matteotitta/pricing-strategy --- # Pricing strategy Develop a data-informed B2B SaaS pricing strategy through customer research, competitive analysis, and structured framework application. Output guides pricing decisions, tier structure, value metric selection, and pricing page optimization. Knowledge type: `pricing-strategy` (per `.claude/rules/ontology.md`); maturity: emergent → validated after team review → canonical when locked. Visual phase map + triggers + input checklist → the premium reference. ## When to run Invoke when the user asks for: `pricing strategy for [product/company]`, `help me figure out pricing for [product]`, `how should I price [product]?`, `Van Westendorp analysis for [product]`, `MaxDiff for feature prioritization`, `design pricing tiers for [product]`, `what's the right value metric for [product]?`, `pricing page optimization for [company]`, `compare competitor pricing in [category]`. Do **NOT** invoke for: pricing page copy only (use `/landing-page-copy` — run this first if strategy needed), competitor research only (use `/competitor-research`), product messaging only (use `/product-messaging`), or quick single-element questions (answer directly without full framework). Full trigger + invocation rules → the premium reference. **The Iron Law:** no pricing recommendation without source verification. Every competitor price cites URL + access date. Price points are ranges, never single points of false precision. Customer willingness data is collected (Van Westendorp / MaxDiff) or explicitly marked as `[Customer research required]` — never invented. Full guardrails → the premium reference. ## Inputs **Required:** - `product name` — product being priced. - `current pricing` — existing pricing if any (or explicit "no current pricing"). **Recommended (improve quality):** - `competitor pricing` — provides market anchors. - `ICP research` — identifies willingness to pay by segment. - `product messaging` — clarifies value prop for pricing alignment. - `customer feedback` — direct willingness-to-pay signals. **Upstream skill outputs (if available, read first):** - `competitor-research` — provides pricing dimension data; market anchoring. - `icp-behavioural` — segment-level WTP signals. - `product-messaging` — value proposition alignment. - `positioning` — frames whether to price above/below market. If product name is missing, ask. If current pricing status is ambiguous (new product vs. optimization), confirm research mode (full strategy vs. specific component) before starting. ## Steps 1. **Validate inputs** → confirm product name + current pricing status + research mode. Pull upstream skill outputs (competitor-research, icp-behavioural, product-messaging, positioning) into context if available. Skip Exa/Firecrawl pulls if competitor-research already covers pricing depth (per the premium reference MCP table). 2. **Phase 1.1 — Competitive pricing analysis** → research 3-5 direct competitors' pricing pages via `web_fetch_exa` (per `.claude/rules/exa-protocol.md`). Document pricing model, tiers, price points, value metrics. Flag public pricing vs. "contact sales". Output: competitive pricing matrix with URLs + access dates. 3. **Phase 1.2 — Value metric analysis** → identify what competitors charge for (seats / usage / features / flat / hybrid). Score options against Value Metric Selection framework (the premium reference): alignment, predictability, growth-friendly, measurable, competitive. Output: ranked options with pros/cons. 4. **Phase 1.3 — Customer willingness research design** → design Van Westendorp survey (4 questions: too cheap / cheap / expensive / too expensive). Identify target segments + sample size (100+). Methodology details → the premium reference (and the premium reference summary). Output: survey ready for deployment. 5. **Phase 1.4 — Feature value ranking design** → design MaxDiff study (4-5 features per set, MOST/LEAST important rotation). Identify features to test (50+ respondents minimum). Methodology → the premium reference. Output: study ready for deployment. 6. **Phase 2.1 — Tier structure design** → apply Good-Better-Best framework (the premium reference). Define feature fencing per tier across usage / access / feature gates / support levels. Establish upgrade triggers (usage 80%, team growth, feature request, success/maturity). Output: tier structure with rationale. 7. **Phase 2.2 — Price point recommendations** → develop ranges per tier (never single points). Document confidence level + rationale per range. Anchor against competitive prices and (if available) Van Westendorp PMC-PME range. Output: price recommendations with ranges. 8. **Phase 2.3 — Pricing page optimization** → select 3-5 experiments from canonical library (the premium reference — annual default, savings %, tier count, enterprise visibility, comparison table, social proof, "most popular" badge, price ending, free trial CTA, per-seat framing). Define A/B hypotheses + success metrics + copy recommendations. 9. **Apply attribution standards** → per `.claude/rules/ontology.md`: `[VERIFIED: exa_search, {url}, accessed {YYYY-MM-DD}]`, `[INFERRED: from X + Y]`, `[ESTIMATED: reasoning]`, `[UNAVAILABLE]`. Quality threshold for client-deliverable strategy outputs: ≥60% verified, ≤10% estimated. 10. **Self-evaluate against quality gates** → the premium reference. Run completeness, evidence-quality, and guardrail checks. Answer self-roast questions honestly. If invented WTP data found → strip and replace with `[Customer research required]`. 11. **Write to client folder** per output template → the premium reference. File path: `{client}/pricing/MMYY-pricing-strategy.md` (or per client CLAUDE.md folder map). Header includes skill name, generated date, font (Inter), version. Include data gaps section + recommended next steps. 12. **Push** to Notion (Pricing Strategy Database) and Google Docs (`client_folder/strategy/`) per push targets in frontmatter. Refresh runs UPDATE existing pages — don't duplicate. 13. **Offer iteration prompts** post-delivery → the premium reference. Surface refinement / expansion / quality offers based on data gaps detected in step 10. ## What good looks like ### Evaluations (binary pass/fail before declaring "done") - 3-5 competitors documented with public pricing or "contact sales" status, source URL + access date per row. - Value metric recommendation made with explicit scoring against alignment / predictability / growth-friendly / measurable / competitive (or marked `[Customer research required]`). - Customer research design included: Van Westendorp survey (4 questions verbatim, target segment, sample size ≥100) and MaxDiff study (feature list, sample size ≥50) — or explicit reason omitted. - Tier structure follows Good-Better-Best with target user + price range + features + upgrade trigger per tier (3 tiers minimum). - Every price recommendation is a range (e.g., `$79-119/mo`), never a single point. Each range has a stated rationale. - Feature fencing has explicit rationale per tier (usage / access / feature gates / support level). - Pricing page section includes ≥3 experiments selected from canonical library, each with hypothesis + success metric. - Data gaps section non-empty if ANY component lacks customer-research backing; "How to obtain" column populated. - Every claim has source URL + access date; confidence level assigned (`[VERIFIED]` / `[INFERRED]` / `[ESTIMATED]` / `[UNAVAILABLE]`). - ≥60% `[VERIFIED]` confidence; ≤10% `[ESTIMATED]` (per ontology threshold for client deliverables). - No invented willingness-to-pay numbers — every WTP claim either cites primary research or is marked `[Customer research required]`. - Output title is `# Pricing strategy: [Product Name]` exactly — no aliases. ## Pre-slim original Pre-slim SKILL.md (774 lines, v1.0) archived at `.claude/skills/_archive/pricing-strategy/SKILL-pre-slim-20260429.md`. See the premium reference ("Changelog") for the v1.1 entry documenting the slim. --- ## Sourced patterns — paywall + upgrade-screen design When the pricing strategy includes in-product upgrade moments (freemium → paid, trial → paid, usage-cap → upgrade), apply these trigger-design patterns: - **Value-before-ask trigger logic.** Users need real product experience before the upgrade prompt fires. Never paywall a brand-new account; let them feel the value first. Trigger at: post-aha moments, usage-limit approach (80% of cap), trial-day-N nearing expiry. - **Cooldown windows in days, not hours.** Once a paywall is dismissed, the cooldown before re-showing should be measured in days (3–7 days minimum), not hours. Hourly re-shows tank trust + product NPS. - **Friction-free path from paywall to payment.** Once the user clicks "Upgrade", the steps to complete payment should be ≤ 3 (plan selection, payment details, confirm). Each additional step doubles drop-off. - **Show, don't tell — feature gating.** When gating a feature, demonstrate the gated benefit through previews, comparisons, or read-only access rather than text-only descriptions. "See the report you'd get on Pro" beats "Pro includes advanced reports." - **Respect the No — easy dismissal.** Visible close button (no hidden ❌, no microscopic dismiss). Easy "no" maintains trust for future conversion windows. - **Dark-pattern anti-list:** hidden close buttons, confusing plan selection, guilt-trip messaging ("Are you SURE you don't want premium?"), forced sign-in to dismiss, modal that returns immediately on click-outside. All of these are short-term conversion uplifts that destroy long-term LTV. - **Track paywall impression rate, click-through conversion, AND post-upgrade churn.** The "winning" paywall variant may convert at higher rate but produce upgraders who churn within 30 days — those upgraders cost more than they earn. (Note: a dedicated `/pricing-audit` skill is on the backlog per `.claude/rules/audit-triage-pairing.md` — these patterns live here in the meantime.) --- ## Final ship gate Run `/premortem --output` before ship. See [`/premortem` skill](../../../../meta/orchestration/premortem/SKILL.md) for the 5 execution domains (will-it-resonate / will-it-convert / will-it-stay-on-brand / will-stakeholder-push-back / will-it-degrade-over-time) and output template. Trivial-case escape: `## Premortem\nNo failure modes — trivial change` satisfies the contract for genuinely trivial outputs.