Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by horsawlarway 4 days ago
I'm going to throw out two counter arguments.

1. There is value in a tool that solves precisely your needs, in the way you want it solved.

I've repeatedly seen enterprise SaaS purchases where the company ends up wrapping/layering on top additional tooling, software, and infra to solve core needs that are absent (or misaligned) from the saas tooling, but required for their specific usage.

I've directly experienced this with: analytics tooling, customer survey tooling, feature flag tooling, and interview tooling.

If your going to dedicate a dev anyways - the numbers can change here.

Is this every SaaS product for every business? Fuck no - but there are products that might be adjacant to your core business where you have both strong preferences & experience, are already spending for customization, and now it makes sense to pull the whole thing in-house.

2. The 50k/m crm is competing with that 500/m crm. which realistically appears to soon be competing with that 50/m.

Even if we stick with your stated observation that end businesses don't benefit from building their own tooling (which is fair and often true, although I'd wager it's not as clear-cut as you imply) - you're dismissing competition that is absolutely willing to undercut the market because they can slip on quality (slop - as you say) but still serve a need to customers who place cost as the primary buying metric.

If the customer is better served by the 500/m crm, why stop there? Why not go for the 100/m crm? The 50/m crm? Why not chug on down to the lowest possible cost competition, which likely will be 2-5 guys with an llm they ask to go copy "[insert crm of choice]", and then bill just slightly over infra costs.

Or the other thing I'm seeing happen in a lot of spaces right now... the "do it all" SaaS companies, that are pumping out into adjacent verticals that previously would have been too expensive to develop. The bill stays the same, but now it's not just a crm, it's the original crm, plus a clone of all the adjacent market leaders... scheduling, billing & invoicing, marketing, SEO, site hosting and design, social engagement, etc...

One SaaS elbowing into other verticals but keeping the bill the same, which I consider functionally equivalent to the competing on price, just wrapped in a different flavor (it won't be 2 dudes in a basement, it'll be 2 dudes on the "crm" squad in a bigger eng dept).

1 comments

50!?! If I needed, I could get CRM SaaS for 10 a month.
A company spending 50k/m usually implies that this is a decent number of seats, on an enterprise contract.

Sure - I can also get a CRM for 7.50/m as a single seat, solo user. That's not really the same product that these companies want.

Ex - look at the price jump between starter and professional here: https://www.hubspot.com/pricing/marketing

Starter is the "under 10" seats, but they don't have most of the features companies actually want, and the next category is suddenly $266/seat/month. Which is what they really expect enterprises to be paying per seat.

But.... like I said, that leaves a TON of room for getting undercut by a copy-cat company if the only competing metric is "price".