How to find out what customers will pay
The fastest way to get a useless pricing answer is to ask “what would you pay?” Here is where real willingness to pay leaks out instead — and how to score it.
Why asking the question doesn’t work
Ask someone what they’d pay for a product that doesn’t exist yet and you get a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question — usually generous, because saying a big number costs them nothing. The same person who says “oh, I’d easily pay $50 a month” closes the tab at the checkout page.
Pricing answers only mean something when they’re attached to a real decision someone already made. The good news: people make and describe those decisions constantly, in public, without being asked — you just have to read them where they happen instead of recruiting them into a survey.
Where willingness to pay actually leaks out
The strongest signal isn’t “I would pay” — it’s “I am paying” or “I paid”. Someone grumbling that a tool costs $40 a month and is barely worth it has told you two things: there’s a market at $40, and there’s an opening below it.
The next strongest is effort. People who’ve built a spreadsheet, stitched together three free tools, or pay a VA to do a thing by hand are revealing demand more honestly than any survey respondent — they’ve spent real time or money rather than nodding at a hypothetical.
The signals that count — strongest first
Not every mention of money is equal. Ranked by how much they actually predict spend:
- Already paying — “I’ve been on their $29 plan for a year” names a live price the market accepts.
- Paying for a workaround — a VA, a freelancer, or a second tool to patch a gap means budget already exists.
- Switching over price — “I left X when they raised prices” marks the ceiling and the trigger.
- Built it themselves — a DIY spreadsheet or script is unmet demand with sweat already invested.
- Asking where to pay — “is there a tool that just does this?” is a buyer with a wallet out.
- Pure complaint, no spend — real pain, but the weakest willingness-to-pay signal; weight it accordingly.
Turning scattered signals into a tier
Reading a hundred of these by hand gives you a vibe, not a number. To decide anything you need every mention reduced to the same scale — which is exactly what the pipeline’s willingness-to-pay field does.
Each thread is bucketed into one of four tiers — high, medium, low, or none — based on whether people describe paying for a fix, asking for one, or merely grumbling about the problem. Constraining it to a fixed four-value vocabulary is what lets a report say “31% of threads show medium-or-higher willingness to pay” instead of handing you 300 one-off opinions to re-read.
Price down from the evidence, not up from your costs
Once willingness to pay is a sortable field, pricing stops being a guess. You can see the prices people already name, the tools they already left, and the gap between “high pain” and “anyone actually paying” — which is usually where a new product lives.
It won’t hand you an exact number; nothing short of a live checkout will. But it replaces “what feels right” with “here is what this audience already pays and complains about”, which is a far better place to run your first pricing experiment from.
See how the scoring works
Willingness to pay is one field in a fixed schema every thread is scored against — here’s the whole method.
How we score pain and willingness to payKeep reading
Validate your startup idea with evidence, not optimism
Test a SaaS or startup idea against real demand before you build.
Read →Find the pain points your customers never put in a ticket
Surface the frustrations customers vent everywhere except your inbox.
Read →How we score a thread for pain and willingness to pay
The exact schema that turns a messy Reddit thread into a rankable pain and willingness-to-pay score.
Read →Revealed vs stated preference
Surveys capture what people say they want. Behaviour reveals what they actually want. The gap is where most products die.
Read →