How to Talk About Value When Clients Compare You to Cheaper Options

“I found someone who does something similar for half the price.” This is one of the more difficult prospective client statements, and how a practitioner responds to it reveals a great deal about their relationship to the value of their work.

The two most common unhelpful responses:

The defensive response: explaining at length why the price is justified, listing credentials and experience, insisting that the quality of the work is superior. This positions the practitioner against the cheaper option and often comes across as dismissive or self-serving.

The immediate accommodation: “Oh, well, maybe I could offer you a lower rate.” This signals that the stated price was not actually grounded, and that the practitioner is primarily trying to secure the client rather than confident that the investment is appropriate.

Both responses misunderstand what the prospective client is actually communicating.

What the comparison usually means

When a prospective client mentions a cheaper option, they are usually revealing that they have not yet been given enough information to make a genuine comparison. They have compared prices, because prices are visible and outcomes are not.

If the prospective client had a clear picture of what each option typically produces — the specific before state each addresses, the specific after state each produces, the typical timeframe — they might not be comparing the prices at all. They would be comparing the relevance of the work to their situation and the credibility of the outcome claim.

The price comparison is usually a symptom of insufficient value articulation: the practitioner has not yet given the prospective client the information they need to compare the right things.

Shifting comparisons from features to outcomes: when a comparison is happening at the feature level (sessions, format, price), the practitioner who helps the comparison shift to the outcome level is helping the prospective client make a better decision. “The question I’d encourage you to think about is not what the price per session is, but what each option is designed to produce for someone in your situation.”

The grounded response

A grounded response to “I found someone cheaper” neither defends nor accommodates. It does two things:

Acknowledges the comparison honestly. “There are practitioners working at many different price points, and some of that reflects differences in the work itself, and some of it reflects differences in how different practitioners price.”

Helps the prospective client compare on the right basis. “The question that would be most useful for your decision is what each option is actually designed to produce for someone in the situation you described. What did the cheaper option say about what they typically see happen for clients who are dealing with [before state]?”

This response is not defensive. It is helpful. It is genuinely in service of the prospective client making a decision that is right for them — which might mean the cheaper option, if the cheaper option is genuinely a better fit.

The value-price framework for price comparisons: a practitioner who holds the value-price distinction clearly can engage with price comparisons without defensiveness. The price is one number. The value is what changes for the client. A cheaper option might produce the same value, a lesser value, or a different value. The comparison is useful only if it is comparing the right things.

The cases where the cheaper option might genuinely be right

This is worth acknowledging directly: sometimes the cheaper option is genuinely more appropriate for the prospective client’s situation.

If the cheaper option is offering something that is genuinely sufficient for what the prospective client is navigating — if the scope of the work is smaller, or the prospective client’s situation calls for something less intensive — then the cheaper option may be the right choice.

A practitioner who is oriented toward the prospective client’s genuine assessment, rather than toward securing the agreement, can say: “If what [cheaper option] offers sounds like it addresses the core of what you’re dealing with, that might be the right fit. I work with practitioners who are dealing with [specific before state] and typically produce [specific outcome] — if that’s the territory you’re navigating, that’s what I’d be working on with you.”

This is not self-promotion. It is honest information that helps the prospective client compare accurately.

Handling price comparisons as price objections: the comparison to a cheaper option is a form of price objection. The practitioner’s internal state matters as much as the words. A practitioner who is genuinely settled about the value of the work can engage with the comparison from that settled position. A practitioner who is uncertain whether the work is worth what they charge will hear the comparison as confirmation of their doubt.

What information helps clients compare correctly: a prospective client who has clear information about what each option typically produces — the before state it addresses, the after state it produces, the typical timeframe — can make a genuine comparison. A prospective client who has only price information is comparing numbers, not value.

The Abundance GPS Skool community helps practitioners develop the inner settledness and the specific value language that makes price comparisons navigable from a grounded position. Join us here.