zlacker

I'm a dev, not a salesperson, but let's be realistic. A company tells you "yeah we're interested in signing at $1M/yr, but we really need this feature, when will you have it by?", to which saying "eh we don't know - it'll be done when it's done" will lead to the company saying "ok well reach out when you have it, we can talk again then" (or just "eh ok then not a good fit sorry bye"), and in the meantime they'll go shopping around and may end up signing with someone else.

Having a promised date lets you keep the opportunity going and in some cases can even let you sign them there and then - you sign them under the condition that feature X will be in the app by date Y. That's waaaay better for business, even if it's tougher for engineers.

>>pocket+(OP)
Unless its the first time they are hearing about it, when a customer asks about a feature, sales should've done their homework and checked with the team doing the work to get a rough estimate instead of pulling a number out of their behinds.

>>pocket+(OP)
Just to consider the opposite viewpoint, I sometimes wonder if it's not better that they do churn in that case. Assuming the sales team is doing their job properly, there are other prospects who may not need that feature, and not ramming the feature in under time constraints will lead to a much better product. Eventually, their feature will be built, and it will have taken the time that it needed, so they'll probably churn back anyway, because the product from the vendor they did get to ram their feature in is probably not very good.

>>pocket+(OP)
“Sign up and pay at least part of it now and we’ll prioritize the feature”.

I’ve seen enough instances of work being done for a specific customer that doesn’t then result in the customer signing up (or - once they see they can postpone signing the big contract by continuing to ask for “just one more crucial feature”, they continue to do so) to ever fall for this again.

>>ravloo+X3
I understand the intuition, but it's a misunderstanding of how software sales operates. There's no tradeoff between prospects who need new features and prospects who don't, because salespeople love that second category and you'll have no problem hiring as many as you need to handle all of them.

>>loloqu+m6
Why do that if your competitor already has it? I'd just go talk to the competitor instead. If you aren't able to ballpark when the feature will be done, why should I trust you will once I pay part of the price?

>>wreath+np
If the competitor already has it why are you talking to me? :)

>>loloqu+cA
Because you have other benefits, so we'd really like to switch over to you, but we can't unless you support this dealbreaker feature that your competitor we're currently using has.

>>stavro+831
No, parent said they’d go talk to the competitor. They didn’t say they were already with them. Don’t change the scenario.

>>loloqu+aa1
Because you have other benefits, so we'd really like to use you, but we can't unless you support this dealbreaker feature that your competitor has.