Matt Ryder explains why calling options cheap backfires in sales. A neuropathy clinic offered patients a $7-8K preventative plan versus a $20K surgery, but framing the cheaper option poorly made prospects suspicious. Better language softens the comparison and respects lower-cost choices.
Cheap is a very, very nasty word. And so that's why I say cheap and cheerful. Because if you're like, the cheap option is this, and then you put it down and say, shit, no good. You know, if that's all they can afford or if that's what they've been doing, that might not bode well for you because, one, they might have got a good result, they might have enjoyed it, but also it's just kind of unnecessary. And then you don't want to make the top option seem like it's over the top or unnecessary as well. And, you know, in the case of, say, like a medical type thing, I work with a neuropathy clinic, and they're kind of at that 7, $8,000 mark, and the top one would be surger $20,000. But we say, like, hey, listen, it's a really fantastic and effective way of doing it. However, if we can avoid people going under the knife and the unnecessary risk that do that by putting in a plan that helps prevent it happening in the first place, then, you know, we feel like that's a net positive for patients. Okay, so again, like, I'm not putting it down, but there is an associated risk, of which I'm just saying that's one of the reasons why we do it this way.
