Good-Better-Best packaging experiments
Three pricing tiers with a clear step-up in value at each level, not just an arbitrary price ladder.
Structuring the offer into three (or more) tiers, each with a genuinely differentiated 'hero' feature or workflow depth, rather than just a bigger number of features per tier.
Why this ring
A standard, extensively evidenced SaaS pricing pattern; research from Price Intelligently found three-tier structures deliver roughly 30% more revenue than single-price offerings, and adding a top tier lifts average contract value 15-25% through the anchor effect. Low risk to test.
SaaS fit
Broadly applicable across B2B and B2C SaaS wherever there are at least two customer segments with meaningfully different needs or willingness to pay.
How to apply it
When to apply: You can identify at least two clearly different customer segments with different needs or budgets.
First steps: Design three tiers around a distinct 'hero' capability per level — ideally gated on workflow depth rather than raw feature count, since customers upgrade when they hit a workflow ceiling, not when they count missing checkboxes. Test the ladder on the live pricing page and track which tier customers actually choose.
Pitfalls: A middle tier with no clearly differentiating value next to the cheapest one breaks the anchoring effect entirely — nobody chooses it, and the whole ladder stops steering customers upmarket.
Metrics to watch: Distribution of plan choice across tiers, average selling price (ASP), and the rate of upgrades between tiers.
Resources
- Good-Better-Best: Does the Three-Tier Pricing Model Still Work in SaaS? — Analysis of when three-tier packaging still works and where it breaks down.
- Good-Better-Best Pricing: Core Pricing Strategy — Framework reference for designing tier differentiation, including the Price Intelligently revenue-lift research.