If you read the LinkedIn post, you already know what I see when I look at Telescope's pricing page. Here's what I couldn't fit in.

The 3-buyer problem is everywhere at this stage.

It usually doesn't come from bad strategy. It comes from not wanting to close a door yet. You're still testing. Revenue is coming from different directions. Why commit to one lane when three are working?

I get it. But here's what's actually happening underneath that decision.

A $47 buyer and a $4,999 buyer are not variations of the same customer. They have different problems, different budgets, different sales cycles AND different reasons to say yes. When you put them on the same page with the same promise, nobody feels like it's really for them.

The $47 buyer looks at the $4,999 plan and wonders if they're getting a watered-down version. The $4,999 buyer looks at the $47 plan and wonders if this is a serious tool or a side project.

And your sales team - if you have one - is explaining 3 different products in every call. That's not a sales problem, but a positioning problem making their job impossible.

I was working with a client - a vertical SaaS for booking dentist appointments.

Their messaging was hitting every angle.

  • Time saved.

  • No-shows reduced.

  • More slots booked.

  • Good product.

Real results.

But nobody was converting.

When I looked at the copy, I asked them: who are you talking to?

"Dentists," they said.

"Okay," I said. "But your copy doesn't say dentists. It says 'healthcare professionals.' It says 'service businesses.' It says 'anyone with appointments.'"

The moment we changed everything to speak only to dentists - specific problems, specific language, specific pain - the conversion rate moved.

They were scared to niche. They thought narrowing down meant leaving money on the table.

It was the opposite.

The irony of specific positioning: the more you sound like you're for one person, the more every person in that category feels like you built it for them.

Dentists read "we help dentists stop no-shows" and think - finally, someone who gets it!

The same works for Telescope. A $47 solo founder and a $4,999 revenue operations team don't want the same thing. They don't even search for solutions the same way.

So here's what I'd actually do. Three moves, in this exact order.

Decide what you're trying to become.

Not what you are today - what you're building toward. Solo founder tool, team platform, or done-for-you outreach service? These are three different companies. Pick one to lead with. Keep the others as tiers if the product supports it, but stop presenting them as equals.

And yes, I know what you're thinking. "But what about the others? I'll leave money on the table."

You won't. They'll come to you anyway.

One of my clients repositioned hard for a very specific ICP. A few months later, someone outside that ICP found her and messaged: "I'm a doctor - does this work for me too?" She hadn't changed a thing on the site. The positioning was clear enough that people outside the ICP could still self-identify and ask. That's exactly how you want it to work. The right buyers self-identify. The edge cases qualify themselves in. Nobody bounces in silence.

Build the front door for your highest-value buyer.

The $4,999 buyer has budget, has a team, has a real pipeline problem they need solved. They're also the buyer who will stay, expand, and refer. Build the homepage for them. Let the $47 buyer self-select in - they will, if the product is good. You don't need to sell them from the hero section.

Give each tier its own story.

Not just different features - different problems, different language, different proof. The solo founder doesn't care about team workflows. The revenue ops lead doesn't care about saving 5 minutes on prospecting. Same product, three completely different conversations. Right now they're all getting the same one.

If you're reading this and thinking about your own pricing page - you're not alone.

Most SaaS companies at this stage have this problem. The product grew in multiple directions. The pricing followed. And now the homepage is trying to speak to everyone without quite landing for anyone.

You don't have to pick forever. But you do have to pick for now.

If this sounds familiar, you know where to find me.

Next week I'm roasting another company. Want to suggest one? Hit reply.

See you next week,

88% resolved. 22% loyal. Your stack has a problem.

Those numbers aren't a CX issue — they're a design issue. Gladly's 2026 Customer Expectations Report breaks down exactly where AI-powered service loses customers, and what the architecture of loyalty-driven CX actually looks like.

That’s a wrap

If you liked this newsletter, let me know. Reading all my emails. 💌

If we’re not connected on Linkedin already - let’s do it right now.

If you wanna see me talking about this, I have instagram too.

If your positioning feels off and you want a second pair of eyes - here's how to book a call with me.

P.S. If someone sent you this newsletter - I would love to know who!

Keep Reading