Sign in Subscribe
3 min read

Product pricing in a saturated market - the Postly use case

Product pricing in a saturated market - the Postly use case

How We Priced Postly in a Crowded Market

Context. Social scheduling is saturated. We didn’t claim a 10× moat. We needed a price that wouldn’t feel too expensive in a price-sensitive market, wouldn’t look too cheap (and low-quality), and still stayed profitable.

This is the approach we used at Postly in 2025, with real decisions you can copy.

The Simple Framework We Used

Cost → Value → Anchors

  1. Cost Floor (Unit Economics)
    Know your cost per unit of value and don’t go below it.

  2. Value Metric (“Enough” Usage)
    Define what “enough content” means for a typical customer per unit (e.g., per channel per month), and ensure the base plan covers it comfortably.

  3. Market Anchors
    Be legible next to per-channel and bundle competitors without inheriting their pricing psychology.

1) Cost Floor: Build Your CPU (Cost Per Unit)

At Postly, our unit is one active social channel.

CPU = Infra & Ops per channel
    + Support per channel
    + Data & Analytics per channel
    + Compliance & Reviews per channel
    + Payments & Risk per channel

Notes we found helpful

  • Use P95 usage, not rosy averages.
  • Allocate support by workload (tickets/time), not just headcount/ARR.
  • Include failed payments, refunds, chargebacks.
  • Recalculate quarterly; platforms and cloud costs change.

Your price must sit comfortably above CPU to leave margin for growth.

2) Value Metric: Define “Enough Content”

Customers buy outcomes (a consistent presence), not feature lists. We set an internal baseline of “enough content per channel per month” that typical creators/SMBs/teams should achieve without hacks on the base tier.

If base plans don’t support “enough,” pricing feels unfair.

We keep advanced publishing power separate as an add-on so the base remains simple and predictable.

3) Market Anchors: Be Legible, Not Led

You’ll face two buyer lenses:

  • Per-channel pricing (clean, often perceived as premium)
  • Bundles/sets (look cheaper per channel at scale, fuzzier for small teams)

Our rule: price from CPU and value truth, not from a competitor’s brand premium. Stay understandable under both lenses; don’t replicate their baggage.

What We Chose at Postly (and Why)

  • Base pricing (per channel): $3 Basic / $7 Team
    • Transparent, easy to forecast
    • Supports “enough content” for typical users
  • Power as a modular add-on: X-Pro Advanced Publishing (threads, polls, tagging, pacing, etc.) is separate from base
  • Operational reliability in base: Bulk via CSV, Google Sheets (coming soon), reliable recurring, RSS syndication

Why this worked for us

  • Clear against per-channel brands without wearing a “premium-price” halo
  • Avoids bundle optics while staying profitable against CPU
  • Lets power users self-select into X-Pro without bloating base tiers

Browse the public, pricing-only comparison we maintain:
https://postly.ai/resources/compare-postly

Messaging That Avoided “Too Cheap” vs “Too Expensive”

  • Name the promise: “Premium publishing. Simple per-channel pricing.”
  • Anchor to outcomes: “Designed to support consistent posting—no bundle calculus.”
  • Draw a clear add-on boundary: “X-Pro is advanced control; base stays simple.”
  • Stay neutral about competitors’ models (don’t sell their benefits for them).
  • Use round numbers with a story: $3 for creators, $7 for teams—backed by CPU and “enough content.”

Microcopy we used

  • “Per channel, per month. No bundles, no surprises.”
  • “Base tiers comfortably support your day-to-day publishing.”
  • “Add X-Pro when you need advanced controls.”

The Worksheet We Actually Used (Copy/Paste)

Unit Economics

  • Infra & ops / channel: $___
  • Support / channel: $___
  • Data & analytics / channel: $___
  • Compliance & reviews / channel: $___
  • Payments & risk / channel: $___
    CPU (floor): $___

Value Definition (“Enough Content”)

  • Typical customer needs ___ posts/channel/month
  • Base tier comfortably supports ___ posts/channel/month

Market Anchors

  • Per-channel peers range we’re comfortable with: $–$
  • Bundle peers: effective per-channel at 5/10/25/50 channels

Our Structure

  • Base per-channel price(s): $___ (Basic), $___ (Team)
  • Add-ons: Name → Promise → $___
  • Volume rules (if any): ___

Guardrails

  • Target gross margin ≥ ___%
  • Payback period ≤ ___ months
  • Support load ≤ ___ tickets per 100 channels

Validation We Ran (Fast & Founder-Friendly)

  • Van Westendorp (PSM): “too cheap/cheap/expensive/too expensive” thresholds
  • Gabor-Granger: “Would you buy at $X?” over a small set of price points
  • Two-cell landing tests: $A vs $B, measuring free→paid, early retention, support load (not just CTR)

Common Traps We Avoided

  • Pricing straight from a competitor’s page
  • “Unlimited” base tiers (a few edge users nuke margins)
  • Feature-packed base plans that muddle the value story
  • Opaque bundles that increase confusion and churn

Closing

In a saturated market without a clear moat, clarity, fairness, and margin discipline win:

  • Build a cost floor you won’t cross
  • Define “enough content” and ensure base plans truly cover it
  • Keep pricing simple per-unit and modular for power

That’s how we priced Postly: $3 (Basic) / $7 (Team) per channel for clear, everyday publishing—X-Pro as a separate add-on for advanced control. Clear to buyers, durable for the business.

Published by:

Paul Onu

Member discussion