The practitioner in this story is a composite illustration — a character drawn from common patterns experienced by practitioners who raise rates. She is not a real individual.

The Practitioner Who Kept the Rate She Almost Lowered

Sarah had been a somatic coach for six years. She charged $175 per session — a rate she had set in her second year of practice and had not revisited since. In her first year, it had felt like a stretch. By her sixth, it had become invisible — neither right nor wrong, just what she charged, the way her coffee order was just what she got.

The rate review happened almost by accident. She was filing her taxes for the year, looking at what she had earned for the number of sessions she had delivered, and the arithmetic landed differently than it usually did. She had seen just over 900 client sessions in the calendar year. She had generated $157,500 from client work. She had worked with 22 clients. The math told her she had worked, by any reasonable account, more than full time — and had earned well below what she needed to feel at ease.

She had known this, in the vague way that practitioners know things they are not quite ready to examine directly. The tax exercise made it specific. That specificity was uncomfortable.

She spent three weeks thinking about a new rate before she arrived at $240. The number had not come from a formula. It had come from a calculation that started with what she needed the practice to generate to feel sustainable — a number she had never actually named before — and worked backward from there. At $240 per session and the same client load, she would generate almost the same income from 30 fewer sessions per year. The math was direct.

The problem was that $240 did not feel like her rate. It felt like someone else’s rate — a practitioner who had more credentials, more years, more certainty. She spent those three weeks sitting with the number, examining it from different angles, telling it to herself in the bathroom mirror with the same clinical attention she might give a client’s somatic work.

She reviewed her client outcomes from the past year. She recalled specific moments: the client who had described the shift in their relationship to their body as the most significant thing that had happened to them in a decade. The client who had returned to their marriage with a capacity for presence they had not had before. The client who had left the work with a relationship to their own nervous system that they said had changed how they functioned in every area of their life. She had not thought of these moments as pricing evidence before. Now she let herself hold them as such.

By the end of the third week, $240 still did not feel entirely ordinary. But it felt more grounded. She decided to announce it.

The announcement went to 22 existing clients via email. She had written it, revised it, and timed it with three weeks of notice before the new rate would take effect. The email was direct: her rate was changing to $240 per session, effective in three weeks. Existing clients who were in active packages would complete those at the current rate. New bookings would be at $240.

Fourteen clients responded in the first 48 hours. Twelve acknowledged the change and confirmed continued bookings. One asked a clarifying question about her existing package. One expressed discomfort.

The client who expressed discomfort was a woman she had worked with for two years. The message was warm but its message was clear: the new rate was going to be a stretch. She wasn’t sure she could continue at $240. She was wondering if there was anything Sarah could do.

Sarah read the message three times. The first time, she felt the pull of the concession before she had finished reading. The second time, she noticed the pull and felt it as a signal — not of the right thing to do, but of the thing she was afraid to not do. The third time, she read it looking for what the client was actually saying.

What the client was saying was that she was uncertain. She had not said she was leaving. She had not said $240 was impossible. She had said it would be a stretch and asked if there was anything Sarah could do.

Sarah sat with the email for two hours before writing back. What nobody explains about holding a rate: the right response in that moment was not a financial answer. It was an honest acknowledgment of the client’s concern followed by clarity about the rate.

She wrote: “I understand this is a change, and I appreciate you letting me know how it’s landing for you. I’ve thought carefully about this rate, and it reflects what the work genuinely costs me to sustain well. I want to continue working together, and I also want to be honest with you: I’m not able to hold the rate at $175. I recognize this means you have a decision to make, and I want to give you the time you need to make it clearly.”

She sent the email. It was the hardest thing she had done in the rate increase process, including setting the rate.

The client responded two days later. She was going to continue at $240. She said she needed to sit with it because she had been startled by the change, but when she examined what the work had produced in two years, the investment made sense.

Sarah had not predicted this. She had predicted the client would leave, which was why she had been so close to offering to hold the rate. The client had not left. And the dynamic between them after that exchange was, somehow, different — as though Sarah’s willingness to hold her position had communicated something about the work that two years of sessions had not.

Navigating the last mile of the rate increase: the subsequent weeks brought two more similar conversations. One client left. One stayed. Sarah held the rate in both cases, which meant she lost the revenue from the client who left and kept the rate for the client who stayed.

By the sixth week after the announcement, the new rate was ordinary. She stated it in new client discovery calls without the visceral hesitation that had characterized the early weeks. When one prospective client expressed surprise at the number and asked if she had more affordable options, she said simply: “This is the rate I work at. If it doesn’t fit, that’s okay — I’d rather you find someone who is right for your situation and your budget.” The prospect booked at $240.

The pattern this practitioner almost fell into: what Sarah had nearly done — offering to keep the rate for the client who expressed discomfort, without the client even asking directly — was the most common form of rate sabotage. It was not the client who had moved to lower the rate. It had been Sarah, moving preemptively in response to a concern that had not yet resolved itself.

The holding period she was navigating: the holding period is the phase that most practitioners describe as the hardest part of a rate increase. The announcement is a single act. The holding period requires sustained action — or more precisely, sustained restraint from the action of conceding — across many interactions.

The position she eventually found: by the end of the holding period, Sarah’s relationship to $240 was different from what it had been when she announced it. She had moved through the discomfort of the first resistance without capitulating. Each held conversation had become evidence. The rate that had felt like someone else’s at the beginning of the process had become, through those held conversations, genuinely hers.

Six months after the announcement, Sarah’s practice had changed in ways she had not anticipated. She had 19 clients instead of 22, but she was generating nearly the same income with 15 fewer sessions per year. The sessions she was delivering felt different — she had more energy for them, more presence, less of the low-grade resentment she had not fully noticed until it was no longer there.

The client who had almost not continued — the one who had said the rate was a stretch — sent her a message at the six-month mark. She said that making the decision to stay had changed something for her about her own relationship to the work. She had realized she had been treating therapy and coaching as things she could afford to let go of when they got expensive. Making the decision to hold the investment had made her feel differently about what she was doing in the sessions. She was showing up differently. The work had shifted.

Sarah read the message and thought about the email she had almost sent — the one where she was going to offer to hold the rate. She was glad she had not sent it.

The Abundance GPS Skool community helps practitioners develop the inner preparation and the holding capacity that rate increases require. Join us here.