[GB_001]

On one hand I definitely agree that transparent pricing gets more customers, if your product isn't made for an enterprise level there is no excuse not to make the prices transparent.

With that being said, many software and web applications that use the "contact us for a price method" that aren't just vultures looking for your info usually need more information in order to price you properly. For example, the size of the company, your budget, your specific needs etc. may be needed to ensure that the company gets a fair specific price that caters to their needs.

[ovi256]

The "needed to ensure that the company gets a fair specific price that caters to their needs" is usually code for "please give us enough info so we can estimate how much we can price discriminate against you". It can only work against you (the buyer) versus a transparent pricing strategy. Otherwise, you know, they (the seller) would ask for all this multi-dimensional info on the pricing page, and give you an estimate there. Many service providers do this, even for complicated multi-dimensional problems, see AWS' price estimator for an example of transparent pricing with lots of inputs.

[Xurinos]

I skip by any site that does not mention a price, but the one thing they could do to get my interest is to at least mention a price range and what goes into the calculation of the lower and upper prices. Ballpark figures are nice, and some small description of the rationale helps me to make a decision, even if it is to make a call to drill down further.

[dsr_]

I'd really appreciate that. It informs the customer and doesn't waste the salesperson's time.

Even better, show me some preconfigured packages that you're willing to sell at a public price. If they look reasonable but I need more, I'll happily talk to a salescritter, now that I understand that I actually have a more complicated problem.

[pyrhho]

Better yet, a calculator, like Heroku.

[ticks]

They may also be charging some clients far too much for certain products, so cannot risk being more transparent. That's why I'm put-off by services that don't quote prices, there's no way of knowing if you are one of the clients that are being ripped-off.

[davemel37]

From a Pure Business Perspective: What you pay for a product or service should have nothing to do with their costs, or pricing to others but rather the value the product creates for you.

From an emotional level: Your concerns have to do with defending your purchase to others and your fear of looking like the fool who "overpaid" for the same product someone else got for less...

This fear should be satisfied with other messaging and tools than pricing transparency. Like, service promises, real testimonials, added value bonuses, and other tools to "feel like the cool kid" who go the best of them.

[prodigal_erik]

As a participant in the market, I have a responsibility to route society's resources to efficient producers. Even when getting ripped off doesn't materially harm me, it's wrong to shrug and let it happen.

[davemel37]

"a responsibility to route society's resources to efficient producers."

I have no idea what that means.

Assuming it is true, would you agree that your "perceived responsibility" in this case has more to do with your emotional needs than it does to your business needs.

your belief is that there are finite resources within the context of wealth, and the transfer of money is a zero sum game, where someone wins and someones else loses.

Your responsibility is to get the most value out of your resources, but you agree that your responsibility is to spend that money, and that money's function is to move around and create wealth.

Your "responsibility" to route "society's" resources to efficient producers, has nothing to do with actually accomplishing that, but rather how you value things and how you feel.

Besides, my point is... you are not getting "ripped off" if you perceive the value to be greater than what you pay. That money will move around, creating wealth along the way, and withholding that money for what you consider a more efficient usage of it is certainly your right, but far from making any difference in how efficiently society produces...

[prodigal_erik]

When I trade with someone who doesn't have a stronger competitive advantage, I have to give them more of our finite resources than others would need to do that job, and that's a lost opportunity for society to create more wealth. We all benefit when good producers can expand and bad ones are stopped.

[davemel37]

While I see what you are getting at, I think this is a very linear view of wealth building and the world, and based on one too many assumptions about things like what constitutes a competitive advantage, and that giving money to more efficient producers in turn creates more wealth...

I do agree that you have a responsibility to yourself to utilize your resources as efficiently as possible, but I hardly think that responsibility extends to everyone participating in the market.

The simple reality is that people make purchase decisions based on emotions and justify their purchase after the decision is made with logic and reasoning.

Whatever logic helps you sleep at night is fine with me, but the reality is we are beasts of emotion and make our decisions based on those emotions.

[michh]

That's no excuse, it just means their pricing model is too complex.

Why not offer default packages with a fixed price for small and medium sized businesses and encourage those that have specific needs/concerns to leave their details to discuss the possibilities and get a quote?

[alexchamberlain]

Whilst I acknowledge that prices don't always reflect the cost of production and supply (think oil), budget is rarely needed to provide you with a price. Provide a price first and I'll tell you if I can afford it or whether you'll have to do better to get my business.

[labaraka]

They could just as easily qualify me by making me select company size, specific features, etc.