Ask YC: Competitor flying under us...
I remember distinctly reading one of PG's maxims: Never let anybody fly underneath you. And we never have.
We are a low cost provider of a hotly demanded product that appeals to public/overnment clients. These particular entities usually pay anywhere between $100K and $20M to have this type of system installed, and can pay ongoing fees anywhere from $500 a month to $500K a year, depending on the size of the organization being outfitted. Suffice it to say that there is a huge market for this product...many many of these organizations all dying to have the product. We have done well with well over $500K in revenue in <2 years, no funding, and a win in a big name startup contest that netted us $100K in cash and prizes out of 250 entrants we competed against.
There are about 6 competitors in the space now. 2 of them are the rolls royce variety -- they don't do any contracts under $1M, have several contracts over $30M, and are public companies or owned by public companies.....they do big government only where the big federal money is, no smaller fish. We aren't really big enough to compete with these fish right now which is fine...we're hot on their tail right now and are very close to taking business away from them.
Two of them are in the middle....been around for 4-5 years, dabble in both big government and small government, both products fairly lackluster and way overpriced. Nonetheless, they are much cheaper than the rolls royces, so they have a smattering of clients that went with them for lack of better option over the years. We have consistently kicked the crap out of them multiple times; neither has ever beat us since we entered the market. We are way beyond them in features and way under them in price, and their customers hate them and call us all the time to switch. Lets call them the Mercedes of the world. They are the least threatening of the bunch.
The last two are "startups" and I use the term loosely. One of these startups scored several "prestigious" contracts before we were around, with a reallllly limited product. They were a little less than the Mercedes variety in price, but IMHO distinctly inferior in features to the Mercedes offering, which was distinctly inferior compared to us. We have had no problem beating them, but occasionally they good a get looking over because they're cheap(er) than Mercedes, but still way more than us.
Now to the issue at hand: the last startup. In this case we have a cornered animal. One man show, has one really small client and is barely a larvae. We knew about him, but never expected to have to take him seriously, because other clients never did and the government rarely goes with early stage startups for anything. The product is really obviously homemade, has zero features other than what we consider the one, basic, bare minimum feature of the product space.
We are at least a third of the way to closing up a large string of smaller government agencies that are associated with each other....we have 3 of them and there are only a few more left. One of the entities in this group is different from all the others in that they draw their funding from an atypical source and are a really ramshackle operation. They are extremely price sensitive. Their folks really love our system, and are totally sold. One thing though: they draw their funding from another department that doesn't give a crap about features, track record, quality or anything, only price. This department also doesn't have to deal with consequences of an inferior system -- they are really just Mom and Dad writing a check for junior to go play with, and are limiting him severely in his allowance. We gave them our standard pricing (which has little margin) and they welched and said semi-finally they are going with the little guy. There are HUGE risks with this because he is remote to them and we are local, and this is an on-site support type of product. We are also universes away in features and they ...
35 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 69.3 ms ] threadLetting this deal go, might also send a strong message to X, Y, Z potential customers, that you are offering much more than the cheapest solution and are willing to walk away.
If you do decide to pursue this deal try and take the hit on the upfront and not the ongoings.
The reason to be concerned about the competitor offering a cheaper product is if: (1) it will turn into a better product, or (2) it works differently enough to make your business model or product obsolete. Unless either of those conditions are met, this guy should focus on growing his own business rather than trying to crush someone else.
But, your problem is not a paradigm shift that alters the competitive landscape. Your problem is a competitor with unsustainable pricing. Don't play that game. It's foolish and you'll lose more customers than you win by playing it. You'll also dig yourself an early grave (figuratively, and possibly literally, if you take your business too seriously).
Ignore your foolish competitor. Build better products, charge the right price for them (you may still be too cheap), and keep working. The low-priced competitor will continue to lowball his bids, and will eventually get a reputation for under-serving and over-promising. In a year or two, you'll have a chance to re-bid the same customers you lose this year. And the customer won't be so interested in getting the product cheaply.
That's only possible if there has been a paradigm shift that the original poster has not identified. He's stated a few times that his company is operating on thin margins. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's running an efficient shop.
I don't believe that leaves room for a "low cost" competitor at the bottom. And, unless it's a commodity, it wouldn't matter anyway. People who do these kinds of acquisitions make a check list...the product that checks off the most items on the list, and brings in a reasonable bid vs. all of the other bidders, gets the contract. It's not like consumer markets.
I still suspect the OP is charging too little, if his product is good, because being the low cost provider in just about any market is not a good place to be. Margins are thin, customer satisfaction is low (think eMachines and Packard Bell vs. Apple and ThinkPad) and you can't make enough to push forward on the projects that'll help you grow and provide better services.
This is precisely the thinking that leads to getting disrupted by a different business model.
Please re-read my whole comment (and the one above it). I've explicitly discussed paradigm shifts that change the shape of the industry. A "different business model" is obviously one such type of shift. But given the description of the situation, I don't believe the OP is in such a moment in the history of his industry.
That could be the case, of course. So, you're right, we are just taking a different view of the provided data.
I owe you all some karma lollipops, they will arrive overnight tomorrow.
You've said that you are operating on razor thin margins. Raise your price and possibly get the attention of the clients of the higher-level competitors.
It's also a kick in the rear to your current potential client that "you are worth it," showing them that this is a good deal for them and that what you're offering is clearly a steal at the present time.
Whatever you do though, don't "threaten" to raise prices on them if they don't call in the next 10 minutes. Just let them know, "We're planning on raising our prices about 15% (made up) next year (quarter, month, whatever), but if you decide the other guy isn't what you need we'd be happy to work something out for you. Just let us know soon."
Goodluck!
If your competitor is as inferior as you say, those agencies might come back to you for advice on how to "fix" the problem caused by the competitor. Then you can charge more and still look helpful.
This happens a lot in other industries and I have personally benefited from it myself. You get to look good, charge more, and providing service to a customer that was previously shafted is easier than one demanding perfection from day one.
It sounds like you are selling to enterprise and/or government. The normal rules about being the low cost provider don't apply like they would in the consumer market. Joe Spolsky has some interesting tidbits on that one. Every time they increased Fogbuz's, their sales went up as well. There's an aura of price==quality in enterprise software. Instead of offering a product with less features for a cut-rate price, introduce a deluxe version with a couple extra features and double the price. You might be surprised.
"The product [...], has zero features other than what we consider the one, basic, bare minimum feature of the product space."
That sounds like a well targeted product to me, however you feel about it. Could you produce an economy version of your existing application that only had that feature? Then you would be in a good position to upsell later on. Even if the time scales make it impractical for this bid, it might be useful if you come up against this guy again later.
Industries with a high enough profit margin that they can still make good money even with discounting heavily are doomed for extinction, and replacement by someone smaller, younger and hungrier. Good luck and enjoy your success while it lasts.
In which case, ignore it. Find the customers who see their problem clearly, and why your specific solution takes care of their needs better than anything else, an concentrate your efforts on them.
Also, if you haven't read SPIN Selling by Neil Rackham, consider doing so when you get some time.
Good luck!
1. It breaks the competition's back. And leaves no room for him to claim territory in the future.
2. With the one man competitor dead you can start increasing prices, clearly in your market there is room for higher pricing. And spend your energy on tackling the rolls-royce and whatever other car you got going there..