[Kamq]

> A higher likelihood of sales isn’t something a buyer is looking for, though.

It's what the sellers are looking for though. And the sellers generally are the ones making these sites.

If you want to put up a website describing what you want to buy, and put a very explicit chart about what you're willing to pay, you're more than free to do so.

[wussboy]

Shouldn’t the sellers should be looking for what the buyers want?

[Kamq]

Depends on the market.

In a market with a lot of sellers with essentially the same product (like a commodity market)? Sure. Prices tend to be pretty transparent in markets like that, because that's what buyers want.

In a market with a small number of sellers, with product distinction (different features, regulatory compliance, etc)? Depends on what we're talking about. Probably not on a thing like price, but a feature that a buyer is willing to pay for up front would probably be much more important.

[mklepaczewski]

Sellers care about maximizing their profit.

[derefr]

Maybe sales people within sellers do. The companies as a whole should worry about losing market-share to competitors and eventually getting shut out of the market. Getting this or that high-profile contract isn't worth much if those contracts switch away one year later citing that your competitor is "what everyone uses now."

[closewith]

This feels like wishful-thinking rather than having any basis in reality. Many SaaS providers with _Contact Us_ pricing are market leaders.

[derefr]

That's an effect, not a cause. You can "afford" contact-us pricing, once you've got a monopoly stranglehold on an industry. You can't afford it when you're a scrappy newcomer fighting for mindshare.

[closewith]

That doesn't track, at least in my experience. Custom Enterprise pricing is prevalent and advantageous at all levels.

Honestly, it seems to me that you just don't like the practice and so are rationalising.