Pricing Strategy Proposal
Specifications
- Slides
- 14 slides
- Aspect ratio
- 16:9 (Widescreen)
- File format
- PowerPoint (.pptx)
- Font
- Calibri
- Version
- 1.0
- Editing
- Fully editable
- Primary color
-
#2563EB
Style
Tags
Showing the first 12 of 14 slides.
About this template
Not an argument to raise prices, but the evidence behind one
Fourteen slides for convincing management and the sales organization before you redesign a plan structure or move a price. The agenda reads “Current price diagnosis”, “Choosing the pricing basis”, “Cost and the price floor”, “Value-based pricing”, “Current price and proposed price”, “Key metrics” and “Trend analysis”, with a divider and a body slide on the first four. Diagnosis, then method, then the cost floor, then the value calculation: the price comes last and the reasons stack up in front of it.
Start at the diagnosis
Slide 4 reads “Held at KRW 29,000 a month for 3 years”, “18% cumulative cost rise never passed on” and “Discount approvals on 41% of new deals” — elapsed time, cost, and discounting. If your reason for touching price is not one of those three, go back and look for better evidence. The discount approval rate is the most reliable signal in practice: when list price is out of step with the market, sales closes the gap with discounts, so the effective price already differs from the list. Raising the list price and tightening discount authority give similar arithmetic but a very different impression on customers, so say which you propose.
Pick one of three bases
The second section is where this template diverges from a generic proposal. “Cost basis used only as a floor”, “Competitor basis as a ceiling reference only” and “Value basis adopted as the primary method” state what you chose and what you used the other two for. If you priced on cost instead, invert those three lines and retitle the fourth section as a cost-plus calculation. A number with no stated basis ends at the first question about where it came from.
Finding the value between floor and ceiling
- Slide 8 — “Monthly cost per customer KRW 11,400”, “Customer acquisition cost repaid in 7 months”, “Target contribution margin of 62%”. What comes out here is the floor you cannot go below. Include only costs that grow with customers, such as infrastructure and support staff; leave headquarters overhead out.
- Slide 10 — “Customers save KRW 2.14m a month on average”, “Price set at about 2% of the savings”, “156 responses on willingness to pay”. Take the savings figure from customer interviews or deployment cases, and state how many you asked.
- There is no body slide for who gets raised and when. Put it as one line on the right of the comparison slide, or duplicate a body slide to make room.
The comparison slide holds the conclusion
Slide 11 sets “Current (2023-2026)” against “Proposed (from Oct 2026)”. The left runs “Single plan at KRW 29,000 a month”, “Discounts handled case by case” and “Price frozen even as features grew”; the right answers with “3 tiers: KRW 24,000 · 44,000 · 89,000”, “Discounts only with annual billing” and “Reviewed once a year against a value metric”. The three lines correspond to price structure, discount policy and review cadence, so keep both sides in the same order when you change items.
Four cards and a willingness-to-pay curve
The cards are 44,000 / “Proposed monthly price (KRW)”, 11,400 / “Cost per customer (KRW)”, 62% / “Target contribution margin” and 6 / “Grace period (months)” — price, cost, margin and the transition window, enough to read the shape of the proposal on its own. The label carries the unit, so edit the parentheses rather than adding a unit to the value. Slide 13 charts “KRW 29k” 148, “KRW 39k” 121, “KRW 44k” 97 and “KRW 59k” 52: the number of survey responses willing to buy at each price point. Even if you would rather show a revenue trend, a willingness-to-pay curve is the one that engages with the proposal.
Before you propose the increase
- Stating a percentage increase without the number of affected customers and an expected churn count. A price plan with no churn assumption does not get approved.
- Using the discount approval rate in the diagnosis and never saying how the new structure prevents it.
- Setting the announcement date and the effective date to the same day. With no grace period the inquiries all arrive at once.