30f9b9a729
* feat: v2.0 skill renames and CRO consolidation BREAKING CHANGE: Users must reinstall skills after this update. ## Skill Renames (16) - ab-test-setup → ab-testing - analytics-tracking → analytics - aso-audit → aso - competitor-alternatives → competitors - email-sequence → emails - free-tool-strategy → free-tools - launch-strategy → launch - onboarding-cro → onboarding - paywall-upgrade-cro → paywalls - popup-cro → popups - pricing-strategy → pricing - product-marketing-context → product-marketing - referral-program → referrals - schema-markup → schema - signup-flow-cro → signup - social-content → social ## Consolidations (1) - page-cro + form-cro → cro (form content in references/form.md) ## Why 2.0? - Shorter, cleaner skill names - Consistent naming (no -strategy, -setup, -cro suffixes) - All cross-references updated across 100+ files Total skills: 40 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): update evals for renamed skills, fix validate script, clear warnings - Update 32 evals.json files to reference new skill names (page-cro → cro, product-marketing-context → product-marketing, etc.) — these were missed in the initial v2.0 rename pass since only SKILL.md and marketplace.json were updated. - Fix validate-skills.sh: replace GNU-only `head -n -1` with portable awk so frontmatter extraction works on macOS. - Move Copy Editing Checklist (56 lines) to references/checklist.md to bring copy-editing SKILL.md under the 500-line limit (508 → 457). - Add "see X" pointers to marketing-psychology description for skill discovery (cro, pricing, copywriting). - Update skill-request.yml issue template placeholder (page-cro → cro). All 40 skills now pass validation with zero warnings. * fix(v2.0): add evals for 8 missing skills, strip stale frontmatter from cro/form.md Adds 48 new eval cases (6 per skill) for skills that previously had no evals: aso, co-marketing, community-marketing, competitor-profiling, directory-submissions, image, lead-magnets, video. All 40 skills now have eval coverage (251 total cases). Strips leftover frontmatter from skills/cro/references/form.md — it was inherited from the old form-cro SKILL.md before consolidation. Reference files don't need frontmatter. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): rename paid-ads → ads One more v2.0 simplification — drops the redundant 'paid-' qualifier. Updates the skill directory, SKILL.md frontmatter, evals.json, README skill table, the v2.0 rename table in VERSIONS.md (now 17 renames), and all cross-references in related skills (ad-creative, aso, competitor-profiling, customer-research, lead-magnets, marketing-ideas) plus the tools/integrations guides. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): bump SKILL.md frontmatter version to 2.0.0 for all 40 skills VERSIONS.md was already updated to 2.0.0 but the metadata.version field inside each SKILL.md was still on 1.x. That mismatch would have caused the update-check flow to perpetually report 'update available' since it compares VERSIONS.md against local SKILL.md metadata versions. Caught by codex review (P1). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): add legacy product-marketing-context.md filename fallback Before this fix, users upgrading from v1.x who had a `product-marketing-context.md` file would lose automatic context loading — every skill only checked the new `product-marketing.md` filename. Now all 40 skills also accept the legacy filename (in either `.agents/` or `.claude/`), and the README migration command covers both legacy and current filenames. Caught by codex review (P1 + P2). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): re-sort README skills table alphabetically, fix ads box width The skills table had a few entries out of alphabetical order from the renames (co-marketing was after cold-email, ads was at the renamed position). Re-sorted alphabetically per sync-skills.js. Also padded the 'ads' cell in the ASCII flow diagram to keep the box width consistent. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): document folder cleanup on upgrade, stop sync-skills from re-adding skills array README upgrade guide now includes: - A clear cleanup step for stale v1.x skill folders (renamed + consolidated) so users don't end up with both old and new folders side-by-side after upgrading - The full v1 to v2 rename map for reference - Existing product-marketing-context.md migration steps (preserved) sync-skills.js no longer (re-)introduces a `skills` array on marketplace.json -- Claude Code's plugin schema discovers skills via the `skills/` directory, and the explicit array was failing validation. The script now refreshes the description count and strips the stale array if present. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
4.7 KiB
4.7 KiB
Pricing Research Methods
Contents
- Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter (The Four Questions, How to Analyze, Survey Tips, Sample Output)
- MaxDiff Analysis (How It Works, Example Survey Question, Analyzing Results, Using MaxDiff for Packaging)
- Willingness to Pay Surveys
- Usage-Value Correlation Analysis
Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter
The Van Westendorp survey identifies the acceptable price range for your product.
The Four Questions
Ask each respondent:
- "At what price would you consider [product] to be so expensive that you would not consider buying it?" (Too expensive)
- "At what price would you consider [product] to be priced so low that you would question its quality?" (Too cheap)
- "At what price would you consider [product] to be starting to get expensive, but you still might consider it?" (Expensive/high side)
- "At what price would you consider [product] to be a bargain—a great buy for the money?" (Cheap/good value)
How to Analyze
- Plot cumulative distributions for each question
- Find the intersections:
- Point of Marginal Cheapness (PMC): "Too cheap" crosses "Expensive"
- Point of Marginal Expensiveness (PME): "Too expensive" crosses "Cheap"
- Optimal Price Point (OPP): "Too cheap" crosses "Too expensive"
- Indifference Price Point (IDP): "Expensive" crosses "Cheap"
The acceptable price range: PMC to PME Optimal pricing zone: Between OPP and IDP
Survey Tips
- Need 100-300 respondents for reliable data
- Segment by persona (different willingness to pay)
- Use realistic product descriptions
- Consider adding purchase intent questions
Sample Output
Price Sensitivity Analysis Results:
─────────────────────────────────
Point of Marginal Cheapness: $29/mo
Optimal Price Point: $49/mo
Indifference Price Point: $59/mo
Point of Marginal Expensiveness: $79/mo
Recommended range: $49-59/mo
Current price: $39/mo (below optimal)
Opportunity: 25-50% price increase without significant demand impact
MaxDiff Analysis (Best-Worst Scaling)
MaxDiff identifies which features customers value most, informing packaging decisions.
How It Works
- List 8-15 features you could include
- Show respondents sets of 4-5 features at a time
- Ask: "Which is MOST important? Which is LEAST important?"
- Repeat across multiple sets until all features compared
- Statistical analysis produces importance scores
Example Survey Question
Which feature is MOST important to you?
Which feature is LEAST important to you?
□ Unlimited projects
□ Custom branding
□ Priority support
□ API access
□ Advanced analytics
Analyzing Results
Features are ranked by utility score:
- High utility = Must-have (include in base tier)
- Medium utility = Differentiator (use for tier separation)
- Low utility = Nice-to-have (premium tier or cut)
Using MaxDiff for Packaging
| Utility Score | Packaging Decision |
|---|---|
| Top 20% | Include in all tiers (table stakes) |
| 20-50% | Use to differentiate tiers |
| 50-80% | Higher tiers only |
| Bottom 20% | Consider cutting or premium add-on |
Willingness to Pay Surveys
Direct method (simple but biased): "How much would you pay for [product]?"
Better: Gabor-Granger method: "Would you buy [product] at [$X]?" (Yes/No) Vary price across respondents to build demand curve.
Even better: Conjoint analysis: Show product bundles at different prices Respondents choose preferred option Statistical analysis reveals price sensitivity per feature
Usage-Value Correlation Analysis
1. Instrument usage data
Track how customers use your product:
- Feature usage frequency
- Volume metrics (users, records, API calls)
- Outcome metrics (revenue generated, time saved)
2. Correlate with customer success
- Which usage patterns predict retention?
- Which usage patterns predict expansion?
- Which customers pay the most, and why?
3. Identify value thresholds
- At what usage level do customers "get it"?
- At what usage level do they expand?
- At what usage level should price increase?
Example Analysis
Usage-Value Correlation Analysis:
─────────────────────────────────
Segment: High-LTV customers (>$10k ARR)
Average monthly active users: 15
Average projects: 8
Average integrations: 4
Segment: Churned customers
Average monthly active users: 3
Average projects: 2
Average integrations: 0
Insight: Value correlates with team adoption (users)
and depth of use (integrations)
Recommendation: Price per user, gate integrations to higher tiers