“Too expensive” is almost never a statement about the price

The short answer

“Too expensive” is a catch-all phrase. Behind it there is almost always one of five things: a missing yardstick for comparison, an unrecognised difference from the competitor, a budget that sits elsewhere, a gut feeling of risk — or, more rarely than assumed, genuinely too little money. The order in the conversation is therefore always the same: first sort, then calculate, and only last — if at all — negotiate. Whoever reverses this order and responds immediately with a reduction may have the order, but not the margin.

Five meanings, one sentence

What is said	What is meant	How to recognise it	What helps
“Too expensive”	No yardstick for comparison	Comes immediately, without thinking, without a figure	Establish a reference: what does the current state cost?
“Too expensive”	The difference is not visible	Names a specific competing offer	Lay the services side by side, not the prices
“Too expensive”	Wrong pot, wrong moment	“Not this year any more”, “I would have to clear that with X”	Talk about timing and the decision path, not about price
“Too expensive”	Risk, not cost	Questions about term, cancellation, “and what if it does not work?”	Take out the risk: a deadline, a trial phase, an exit
“Too expensive”	Really too expensive	Names a figure and a limit, and sticks to it	Offer a smaller scope — or say no honestly

The top four rows dissolve through questions. Only the bottom one is a price question. Whoever treats all five the same gives away money in four out of five cases that he would not have had to give away.

The first move: sort, do not justify

The reflex to justify immediately is the most expensive moment in the whole sales conversation. Three sentences that work instead:

“Compared with what?”

Two words, and they force the yardstick to the surface. In half the cases what follows is not a competitor but a gut feeling — and a gut feeling is negotiable, a quote is not.

“Too expensive in the sense of too much money — or in the sense of not worth the effort?”

This distinction separates the budget question from the value problem. With a value problem no discount helps; it even makes it worse, because it confirms that the price quoted was not meant seriously.

“What had you expected?”

Then stay silent. The figure named is the most important information in the conversation: it shows whether you are talking about ten per cent or about a different league. At ten per cent you have a conversation. At double, you have proposed the wrong customer or the wrong product — both good to know before you spend three weeks following up.

The counter-calculation: set the price against the current state

A price without a reference is always too high. The task is not to make the offer look cheaper but to change the comparison — away from the competing offer, towards what the current state costs.

An example calculation from payment sales, with freely chosen figures for illustration — no customer data, no survey: a business does €20,000 in card turnover a month. Offer A costs 0.89 per cent, offer B 0.79 per cent. The difference is €20 a month, and half an hour is spent negotiating over those €20. If the terminal fails on a Saturday and provider B has no replacement device before Tuesday, two days of turnover are at stake: at €20,000 a month, around €1,300. That uses up five years of price advantage in one weekend.

You make this calculation as a question, not as a threat: “What happens at your place if the device stops working at midday on Saturday?” The customer then does the arithmetic himself — and nobody contradicts his own figure.

The reverse direction applies just as much, and you should know it before the customer does: at a 30 per cent contribution margin, a five per cent reduction costs a sixth of the contribution margin. To make that up takes 20 per cent more sales volume. With ongoing contracts it takes effect every month across the entire term. Whoever does not know this figure by heart is negotiating blind.

When a competing offer is on the table

That is the only case in which you really do lay prices side by side — but never prices alone. Four lines are enough, and you fill them in together:

1. Term and notice period. A lower monthly price over 60 months is something different from a higher one over 12.
2. What happens in the event of a fault. Who picks up the phone, within what time, with what replacement?
3. What is not in the price. Set-up, SIM card, paper rolls, software maintenance, per-transaction fee for certain card types.
4. Who is liable when something goes wrong.

If after these four lines a real difference is visible, the price discussion is over — not because you have won, but because the same thing is no longer being compared. If no difference is left, the competitor is simply cheaper. Then you say so and leave: “For the same scope of service, that offer is better than mine. Take it.” I have had more callbacks from sentences like that than from many a close.

Where can I see straight away whether an offer is below or above the market price?

Nowhere at a glance: for B2B services that need explaining there is no published market price against which a single offer can be read. The picture only becomes visible once two or three offers are put on the same lines and calculated over the full term, not on the monthly price.

This is how the comparison works in ten minutes:

• Total cost over the term instead of the monthly rate: base fee × months + one-off costs + usage-based charges at a realistic volume.
• Same scope of service: fill in the four lines from the previous section (term, faults, what is not in the price, liability) for every offer. Only then are the figures comparable.
• Public price lists as an anchor: where providers publish standard prices, these mark the upper limit for small volumes. An individual offer above that needs a reason.
• Components instead of a package price: with card payments, for example, every offer can be broken down into interchange, scheme fee and mark-up; the guide to card payment fees shows how.

For the salesperson this means: whoever offers the customer this comparison instead of fearing it answers the objection before it is raised.

What never works in this moment

• The pre-emptive discount. A reduction before the customer has asked for it says: the first price was not meant seriously. From then on every price is checked, not believed.
• Listing services. “But you also get …” answers a question nobody asked.
• The comparison with everyday costs. “That is only two coffees a day” belittles the customer's concern and comes across as condescending.
• Pressure through deadlines. “The offer is only valid until Friday” works exactly once and costs the relationship.

Action list

1. Know your own contribution margin calculation before every price conversation — for the three best-selling offers, written down, not estimated.
2. Never answer “too expensive” on the substance. The first reaction is always a question: “Compared with what?”
3. Go through the five meanings in your head and assign one out loud before any argument is made.
4. Change the yardstick: what does the current state cost, including downtime, duplicated work and waiting time?
5. Ask for the expected figure and then stay silent. Ten per cent apart is a conversation, a hundred per cent is the wrong customer.
6. Tie every reduction to something in return — term, scope, advance payment, reference. Never without.
7. Bring the price question forward: ask about the range in the first meeting instead of discovering it while following up.
8. Be able to say no. A lost quote at the right price is cheaper than a won one at the wrong price.