Customer choice in product packages

[alex042]

I've noticed that web hosts have similar services, but have split them off into a various amount of packages.

A common example of this is the $10/m 500MB single package deal host who only has this 1 package to sell whereas another host may have 5 or 10 packages with 1 of them being a similar $10/m 500MB package with the others possibly ranging from 50MB to 1GB with similar pricing.

What have people found most customers want? How much choice do they want? If you have a large number of packages, do you find some of them are significantly utilitized more or less than others? What do you do with those packages? Do more choices lead to customer confusion? What is the typical threshold?

If you have multiple packages, what's the breaking point or monetary threshold between packages where it's worth spliting the packages and spending the time doing the upgrades/downgrades to accounts during terms? $1? $2? $5/m?

Also, do customers get confused about packaging and product lines? Do seperate product lines for similar products lead to better customer response? Say for example you offer personal hosting and business hosting as seperate product lines, does this typically lead to more sales or is this more work than necessary?

[Karen]

I offer way too many plans, but since I have customers using all of my plans. I don't want to change it.

If I had to do it again, I would only offer 4 plans and not more. Most customers only order the same few plans so I am able to determine which plans are the popular ones.

I have noticed however, that most customers will go for the smaller plans(50 MB / 5 gig). These customers are individuals, small business and sole proprietors (sp?). Any customers who want the larger plans (the 1000 MB / 30 gig type) usually will go with well known hosts, or the more expensive hosts. It has been my experience that anyone who needs that amount of space is needing it for a reason (IE huge corporation website, well establish non profit etc) and they would rather pay higher costs for quality than a lower cost just for space.

Karen

[Chicken]

Originally posted by Karen:

I offer way too many plans, but since I have customers using all of my plans. I don't want to change it.

If I had to do it again, I would only offer 4 plans and not more. Most customers only order the same few plans so I am able to determine which plans are the popular ones.
karen, there's nothing that says you have to continue to offer more than four plans.

[Karen]

Originally posted by Chicken:

karen, there's nothing that says you have to continue to offer more than four plans.

well of course not, but then I would have to restructure, update my site, update my database, my billing, etc ...

nah it is just too much work.

:p:

Karen

[Chicken]

Originally posted by alex042:

How much choice do they want? Do more choices lead to customer confusion?
Just to head back into this thread for a minute, IMHO Karen is spot on with four packages. You can get away with five, but there's absolutely no need for more and as you said, it just gets more confusing to pick from a 200MB package and a 250MB package.

I looked back into the archives to find the hosting site I designed years ago (~4 years ago, never 100% finished, but close), and I listed 5MB, 25MB, 500MB as the break down points, which probably wouldn't work today. Then again, having an image of a RaQ3 probably wouldn't be a strong selling point either ;) :D

[alex042]

Actually, I thought cobalt had something going there, but they slacked off and dropped the ball.

As for the magic number of 4, is that all virtual hosting packages, personal and business packages combined? What about reseller packages?

[Karen]

I would leave it to 4 of each type of package. If you offer personal, business and reseller, I would create 4 of each type. I would also offer them separately, on different web pages, instead of combined onto one page.

Karen




but don't listen to me because I don't follow my own advise!
:banana:

[alex042]

Is overlapping Virtual and Reseller packages confusing? i.e. A virtual account with 300MB space and 15GB transfer for $18 and a reseller account with 1000MB space with 15GB transfer for $15. Do people actually buy the virtual account when the reseller account is a better deal? I've noticed this with some hosts while others put more of a gap between virtual and reseller packages.

[Chicken]

It depends on what your virtual packages offer. If they offer multiple domains, then there's more of a blur, but if the virtual account is one domain only, then a **** reseller account should be more. (**** reseller account defined as one in which people get a certain amount of space and can split that space up for their clients' domains). I don't see why a 1000MB/15GB reseller account would cost less than a 300MB/15GB virtual account. Doesn't make sense to me.

As for Karen's advice, I agree. You could even take it a step further and have the offers be on different (but networked and linked) URLs, bascially branding each type. ChickenHosting.com, ChickenReseller.com ChickenBusiness.com - I don't know, but at least on different pages, menu'd at the top so users can easily find it and all packages.

As for Cobalts and having something and dropping the ball, I agree. Lot of people were into those buggers and I don't know why they didn't develop that and/or sell it as a 3rd party cp. It's limitations could have been plugged, and overall it was a somewhat stable, easy to admin system, easy to upgrade, add packages, easy for the end-user to use (not overly complicated and did the basics well). Plus, as an added bonus, the servers looked really neat! :D

[alex042]

You could even take it a step further and have the offers be on different (but networked and linked) URLs, bascially branding each type. ChickenHosting.com, ChickenReseller.com ChickenBusiness.com
How effective is branding services to multiple domains instead of consolidated into a single domain? It seems like a lot of extra websites to keep updated, but maybe this simplifies it for some customers?

It's limitations could have been plugged, and overall it was a somewhat stable, easy to admin system, easy to upgrade, add packages, easy for the end-user to use (not overly complicated and did the basics well). Plus, as an added bonus, the servers looked really neat!
True, Cobalts not only had a neat looking chassis, but web interface as well. In fact, I'd prefer to offer it over the more complicated cpanel to some customers because of its simplicity.

I'm not sure why they didn't just continue with the line. Hardware has came a long ways since their time and cobalt should have upgraded with the times along with the software. I suspect most of the software is, or could be, virtually the same as on many other servers leaving the Company with supporting their RAQ software similar to cpanel or many other control panels. Also, I kind of liked the appliance idea. If you need a new server or upgrade, just add a new unit or replace the old unit with a new one. The hardware was already basically configured and software installed.