Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Your users are doing that. That tells me that you've got kind of a misalignment there that you've got to resolve. And so what we did was, you know, just increase the complexity very slightly. So now we've got two levels of users.
[00:00:10] Speaker B: Yo, Mike, check. What's up everybody? You're listening to the Street Pricing podcast, the only show where proven SaaS leaders share their mindset and mistakes in pricing so we can all stop guessing and start growing. Enjoy, subscribe and tell a friend. Now let's break it down with your host and sought after slayer of bad pricing, Marcos Rivera.
[00:00:33] Speaker C: What's up and welcome to the Street Pricing Podcast. I'm Marcos Rivera, author, founder and CEO of Pricing IO. Today's guest is someone I'm really excited to bring on because he loves solving hard problems just like I do. And I would love to break down all the different ventures he's been through, all the lessons he's learned. Today I have Peter Bonnie. He's the founder and CEO of Fastbreak rfp. Peter, welcome to the show.
[00:00:56] Speaker A: Thanks, Marcos. Great to be here.
[00:00:57] Speaker C: No, love to have you. I think we're in for a treat here because you're living it, you've been in it, and I think there's a lot to share out there in terms of the startup life. Right, but before we get into it. Exactly. I want just to give the audience a chance to get to know you a little bit. So tell them about what you do and a little bit about your background.
[00:01:15] Speaker A: So I'm the founder and CEO of a company called Fastbreak. And what we do is we help businesses, particularly bigger businesses, and more specifically bigger businesses that sell to big businesses. We help them complete lengthy questionnaires that they have to fill out as part of their business, whether that's an rfp, which stands for Request for proposal, where they are filling out a lengthy questionnaire in order to win business, or a lengthy compliance questionnaire that they're filling out, you know, as part of like kind of a post sale process or kind of a box check along the way, which is sort of standing in between a closed deal and actually getting the revenue is like checking all these boxes to actually onboard with their, their end user. So yeah, we help with that and our customers include large organizations in like the health insurance space, manufacturers, software companies. It really runs the gamut. The common theme is they've got these complex questionnaires, a lot of internal experts that get involved in managing the process. It's very time consuming, it's very costly, and we Help automate that.
[00:02:24] Speaker C: I just love a big juicy rfp. And spending all day answering those questions. Said no one. Right. This is a major pain, a major pain. Point problem. I've been in enterprise, you know, software, big companies selling to big companies, banking, et cetera. And RFPs, when they come in, just create all sorts of noise and chaos and hectic across all the. Across all the org. Now, here's the thing. You're doing this now and you're probably, you know, at this stage, learned a lot about the problem, right. As you were digging deeper. So we're going to talk and learn about how you learn, which is very interesting angle I want to take today. But with that, I would love to jump right in, man. Are you ready to get street with me?
[00:03:04] Speaker A: Love to.
[00:03:05] Speaker C: Let's do this. Let's do this. So for the audience, really short roadmap here. What we're going to do is this show is really based on the book Street Pricing. So what we're going to do is start with rewind. Let's get into a story. Success, failure, anything. We want to make sure there's a good, juicy lesson behind it. Then we'll bring it up to play, which is what's working nowadays. What are you doing right now?
[00:03:24] Speaker A: That.
[00:03:24] Speaker C: That seems to be moving the needle. And then we'll go fast forward. Let's take a look ahead. Where are you going? What's next? And then we'll break that down. Does that sound good?
[00:03:32] Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely.
[00:03:33] Speaker C: All right, terrific. So let's go ahead and start off with a story. Success or failure? Peter, take it away.
[00:03:38] Speaker A: Yeah, sure. So we launched in about a year and a half ago. It's kind of, you know, late 2003. Sorry, 2023. Excuse me, man. Time traveling, late 2023. So let me give just a little bit more context on the product because I think it's relevant to the internal discussions we had about pricing and all the different pricing models we experimented with at first. So the product fundamentally is about, you know, you have this long list of questions and you're using a combination of AI and existing content to generate answers to those questions. And then, you know, kind of collaboration workflows for. For people to actually review them and sign off and so on. But in terms of the cost drivers of our business, what drives our margins from the product usage? It's the AI generation, right? Like, as everybody knows, very famously, in order to actually run big AI models, it costs money, right? Whether you are paying a third party like OpenAI or Anthropic or Google or you are maintaining your own servers and running GPUs on them and then paying for the power of those. There is a cost associated with each model call that you make. Now we use third party models and so we're paying an API cost or paying sort of per call to the API. And so when we were starting out, we were sort of thinking about like we didn't really know actually what the usage model might look like, right? Are people going to be generating a ton of API calls? Are people going to be generating a ton of answers? Or is it going to be, you know, that they're going to do it one time and then be done? And the usage, like not knowing the behavior, meant it was hard for us to predict what our cost would look like. And so the obvious thing to do, like everyone's very into this idea of usage based pricing because it kind of theoretically aligns both the cost of running your business and the value that your customer is getting, right? In theory, if they're using it a lot, they're getting more value, therefore they should be willing to pay more. And as a provider, if they're using it more and it's costing us more and they're paying us more, that all aligns really well. And so I think the, it might not have been the first thing we did, but the second thing we did was a usage based pricing model where it was basically based on the number of answers that you generated per month. And even that is not totally aligned between like the way that like OpenAI and others charge, but close enough, right, so that, you know, there was no kind of mismatch between what we were paying to run the product, basically our main cost driver, and then how our customers were using it. Well, it turns out that as much as everyone likes the idea of usage based pricing because it's, you know, it's theoretically aligned. I think mostly economists like it.
It's like when you talk to, you know, a sort of a normal end user, someone who's not in the ins and outs of finance and even if they are in the ins and outs of finance, they, what they tend to focus on is this uncertainty. Like I don't know how much it's going to cost me, right? Like I might be signing up for this and if I use it a lot, like, great, I'm getting value, but like, then I'm paying a lot and like I'm part of a big company, we've got budget constraints, I've got to get approvals. Like my CFO wants to Know what it's going to cost? I can't tell him. Well, it depends on how much I use it. So I remember we, we lost an early deal that I, you know, I can't totally chalk it up to pricing, but we spent so much time trying to explain pricing that I think they just moved on, right? Like it was just too much for them to figure out. You got to make it easy for people, right? And so my takeaway from that experience was usage based pricing makes sense for us. When we are paying for these APIs, we're technical, we understand the unit economics of our own business and our costs. That makes sense. And we also know what the trade off is there. That like the alternative is we've got to run these servers ourselves. So like, you know, the usage base pricing makes sense. We're going to pay it either way. But passing that model along to our customers, they're not there. We needed to do something different.
[00:07:46] Speaker C: That is a valuable lesson all around. Now listen, I have, I talk to a lot of these economists, right, and we, we get together on this type of stuff. And usage based pricing, by the way is very elegantly aligned to value, right? I mean, hey, look, you use it and you pay more and it's, it's totally fair. Think of your electricity bill or any utility, right? It kind of all makes a lot of sense. But when you then reapply that same concept, this is again the, I think the, the economist dilemma here, which is it's really hard to see like how this stuff really works in real life and people who may be rational or irrational in their thinking and how it works. But there is nothing irrational about saying, hey, my CFO needs to know how much to budget, how much we're going to put in there, how much we're going to cost because we're running a business and this is a line item and I need to know what that is. And that's real, what real people need to know. And if you can't tell them that, then it starts to create friction and then that friction can lead to, like I said, a lost deal could lead to longer sales cycles, could lead to this, you know, unnatural behavior and concessions just to get past it. I mean there's a lot of things that happen on the downstream. So I like usage based pricing under certain contexts. I think it makes sense, especially when the product is doing most of the work and not the human. But there is, there has to be an element of do we know what this thing's gonna cost me? Can we protect me from the upside, everyone always, I think we're still suffering from the, the scars of the, of the AT&T bill that came in. When you went over your minutes, do you remember the time they used to charge us for minutes? Right? And you, you went over your minutes because grandma called you on a Friday instead of on Saturday. And then next thing you know your, your freaking bill comes in. It's like quadruple, right? So I think there's, you got to offer what I call like familiarity and, and some confidence in the pricing model and the, what they're going to pay if you're going to try to go down that usage based route. So did you stick with your guns? Did you stay usage or what did you do next?
[00:09:35] Speaker A: No, the next thing we did was then we went to a flat user based model, right? And you know, this is, it's one of those things, right? Like per seat license, like per seat billing. Everyone kind of agrees that it sucks, but it's sort of the least bad option, right? At least when you're talking about business productivity software, I think because it just makes sense to people. It's like, okay, like I'm gonna pay to get access to this, but once I have access I can just use it and not think about it, right? And so yes, I've gotta think, who needs access? But you know, I don't have to think too hard about it. Beyond that it's, it's pretty clear. And especially when you're talking about, you know, in our context, right? If you're talking about a company that has a proposal team, right, and you've got three people, five people, 15 people, whatever it is, or maybe a proposal team of one. And it's just like, well, okay, this person's going to be using it and so they need a license. Simple, straightforward, right? So that was at first, at first. And then because there's a, you know, there's a coda to this, right? But at first switching from kind of a complicated usage based model, I think we also briefly considered doing something with like usage tiers maybe. But you know, then it was like, well, this is going to be even harder to explain. Let's just go, you know, straight up user based pricing. And that was simple and easy for people to understand. And that led to kind of, you know, our initial, initial tractions. Like, well, okay, then it's just a simple question of like, what's it going to cost me? How many people do you have? Okay, this is what it's going to cost. Do we want to pay it or not is this good? And so that's what we did and that got us pretty far along.
[00:11:11] Speaker C: Excellent, excellent. So you went completely 180 and said, I'm not doing this usage based stuff, whether it's token or per input output and all that kind of things, which again takes a lot of explanation, is flipping to the flat fee or the per seat model. I agree. Easy to explain. People get it, it's been around forever. And so there's that familiarity factor that you've really been able to nail. Team, I want to take a quick pause here to ask you for a huge favor that'll mean a lot to me. Please review and share the show. Share it with your team, your friends, your peers. Not only will it help them stop the guesswork in pricing, but it'll also help you and increase the chances that you'll take action and change for yourself. All right, much love. Now back to the show. Are you finding that your customers are as a result of the seat based model, are they trying to buy as few seats as possible? Are they gaming? Are they sharing? What do you see out there?
[00:12:04] Speaker A: Well, this, this leads to the coda. Now our business is a little bit unique in the following sense. I mean it's not unique like this, this, this concept of kind of like, you know, your sort of power users and your white users that exists. Right. So the next evolution of seat based pricing is different types of seats. Right. And so what we eventually ran into is when you start, when we started reaching into bigger organizations, we found that there was a lot more need and desire to kind of have like the core team, like the people who actually, you know, kind of responsible for shepherding these questionnaires, these RFPs. But then a very, very large number of subject matter experts that needed to look at them, they weren't responsible for them. It's not their job to run these things. But like, you know, say in a thousand question rfp you might get a hundred IT security questions and somebody from IT security is going to have to look at the answers. Even if the AI is doing a great job generating the answers. Like the human expert needs to look at those and approve them. And so that person needs access, they don't need a full license. Right. Or I should say the pushback was I don't want to pay the same price for them as I'm paying for the proposal manager because the usage is different. And that made sense. You know, that was something where we just have to listen to customers. Like as much as I would like to say Like, I think at the time. So we're now charging $250 per core, what we call core user per month, which is sort of your, you know, your power users. And at the time, I think it was. It was cheaper for the core users, but we only had the single type of user. It was like. I think it was like $120 per user per month. And so, yeah, if they were saying, like, look, our proposal managers are getting that much value out of it, but I can't now have a hundred other people paying a hundred bucks a month just because they're going to look at a couple of questions here and there. And so, you know, that revealed kind of a misalignment between what we were doing. Not intentionally, but the way we were pricing to be, you know, as simple as possible, and then what our customers were facing. I guess maybe to put it really simply, it was leading to a situation where for a lot of use cases, the cost was fine, but in these cases where you had big companies and a lot of people needing to touch it, the cost was just too high. I mean, it was. It was pretty straightforward. And so we never got to the point of people like, gaming the system or trying to share seats or anything like that, because we just nip that in the bud. Like, we're. I. I don't want to ever encourage people to do that. If people were doing that. If your users are doing that, that tells me that you've got kind of a misalignment there that you've got to resolve. Right? And so what we did was just increase the complexity very slightly. So now we've got two levels of users. We've got your core users who are paying $250 per user per month. And then you've got the, what we call reviewers who are paying $40 per user per month. And what I've found is that at that level, companies don't even really give it a second thought. It's like, you know, you've got to find that sweet spot, and maybe if we push the price up, will bump up to resistance. But, you know, there's some price in our case for that kind of second type of user where it's low enough that they're just like, okay, yeah, fine, if I need to add so and so, like, that's. That's cheap enough. I don't care. Right. And in some sense, that's kind of the magic level, right? You want them to not have to think twice about it. Just do it. Just add users, just grow you know, grow the usage and never give it a second thought.
[00:15:20] Speaker C: Agreed. You don't want 15 meetings around the pricing model and should we add this person to that person, especially at this stage. Right. You said you launched around mid 2023. Right. So what you're doing here and this something I talk a lot about in my early chapter three in the book is this idea of learn before you earn. Right. And so there is a, I think a massive amount of learning. What adds friction, what are they, you know, what maybe creates questions or resistance and then sort of modifying or moving around, changing your model parameters to try to make it so that you're easy to fit. So here's the thing, right?
[00:15:55] Speaker A: Yes.
[00:15:55] Speaker C: You're already, they never used you before, Right. So they're already unsure about the impact, unsure how this is going to change things. And then when you layer on I'm unsure about what I'm going to pay on top of all that, then it just makes it just really hard to get going. Right. But if you can remove that last piece and just say, look, I know that you're trusting us. We're telling you you're going to get all this value. We make it very easy to. This is what you're going to spend. So they can do the math in their head and like, all right, even if this doesn't go all the way, I'm okay. Big companies have enough complexity to deal with. Right. And so layering it on top just makes it makes it hard for them to buy you and try you once you're in there. I'm going to ask you this question because I don't know for sure, I'm not in your shoes, but you probably got customers now that have used you for some period of time. They're like, oh, I get it, this is good, I want more. Right? Is that what, is that what's going on?
[00:16:40] Speaker A: Yes. You know, a pretty common dynamic is it's even more straightforward. It's just like, oh, we thought we had, you know, 50 subject matter experts that would need to get involved in these RFPs. It's actually 75. Right. And like I said, if the pricing model for adding those additional subject matter experts is both, you know, transparent enough and low enough, they're just not going to think twice about it. Like, that is perfect. Right? If it's sort of like, you know, if it's like, okay, hey, we need to add 25 more users, you know, it's going to cost us X dollars. Right. Like, they come to you and say, that's what we're going to pay. Right? Like great. Like you know that that's, that's the dream. Not having to like go through this like protracted discussion and negotiation and you just want them to be, I, at least me, I don't, I don't want to generalize too much because as you said, we're still early, we're still learning. Like you know, talk to me in a year and maybe we be doing something different, I don't know. But for now, I don't want to be thinking about pricing. I don't want them to be thinking about pricing. I want them to feel like they're getting a good deal and to just be happy to add additional users at a cost they feel is reasonable and you know, put in a good word for us and refer us to their friends.
[00:17:49] Speaker C: And refer us to their friends. That actually a bigger, bigger deal than you think. Right? Because all these folks talk and in these early stages where you're trying to get traction, you're trying to get some folks to use you and get the momentum building, that is actually a little more important than say trying to grab every single dollar you possibly can from that deal. So I think you got your priorities right on that one. And for me the fact that it's working is good. And I think you're wise enough to know you're likely going to change that model in the future. You're probably going to end up in some hybrid form in the middle. I think you went way too much on the usage aligned, complex side. Now you're on the simple side. It's working. I think ultimately you may end up somewhere in the middle. That's my prediction. But we'll talk to you in a year and you can tell me if that actually plays out right. So I think those are very valuable lessons in the rewind. Let's take it to today. You already started hinting at it now but what's working now is this, this sort of very straightforward model that is. Now you said you've tiered the seats to a couple different tiers to sort of align with their value perception. Why does this work? I'll give you my quick, my quick react, knee jerk reaction to this thing because I've seen this before. I have this, this theory around the product versus the person, like I hinted at a minute ago, in the product when it does all the work, like a snowflake or something tends to be really good, really well suited for a usage based, consumption based model when you're humans are still in the product Doing stuff. Think of like Figma or Slack or something like that or notion when the human is still in there doing stuff and when they're thinking about the number of humans you're helping and the number of humans in there, Believe it or not, user receipt base can still find its way into the model, right. In some cases even, even with a blended so because when you said 50 folks, you know, replying to RRPs went up to 75 other people having to come in and answer questions, right? So that's a very big part of their calculus on how much value it is for them. So when you charge by the user, it aligns really nicely in their brains. I do think ultimately you're going to have to add more, more body to that model later. But for now I think it's the right call to get, to continue to get traction and by the way to learn the right usage beh behavior so you can charge for usage properly later and sort of work that way, work it into the model. Ultimately I think that's a really smart move. Here's my big question for today though. If you had to say there's one thing in the model that kind of trips us up or we're seeing, you know, and I'm talking about not just at the sale point of sale, but maybe even at the point of upsell or maybe at the point of renewal, you might see a downsell. I want to know, is there a little dark side to this model that you're seeing already?
[00:20:21] Speaker A: Yeah, actually. So by not having the usage component, like there is definitely an element of value capture that I know that we're missing in some cases. So there are, there's sort of the core feature we have, right, which is responding to RFPs and there the user model we've got seems to align really, really nicely. It seems to work great. There's an additional thing that everybody who uses the system can do and I think maybe this is where things might look different in a year. We call it Ask the AI. It's very simple, right? Like outside of an rfp, outside of a questionnaire. I just want to know something about our product or our company. Maybe I've got a sales email I want to write. Maybe there's, you know, I want to do some marketing brainstorming and I want to do it, you know, I don't want to go to chat GPT and do it because I want to do it with my company specific content with knowledge of especially sometimes highly technical concepts. Right. That we've got in our knowledge Base. You know, an example is one of, one of the health insurers we work with. Someone on their marketing team did some brainstorming around how to explain in a presentation this pretty abstract and technical concept of a particular kind of pharmacy rebate to an HR professional who's looking at, you know, at buying their services.
And you wouldn't want to go to ChatGPT to do that because ChatGPT just doesn't know enough and doesn't know the company's specific information. You're not just going to upload that information to ChatGPT. So, you know, for things like that, that marketing person is getting a lot of value by just kind of sitting around asking questions, brainstorming. And it's not driving our cost to the point where we're like upside down on the contract or anything like that. But when people start to do that and they realize like, oh, this works really well and they get really excited and they're like, oh, let me ask this, let me do this, let me find this other problem. Like, hey, you know, hey Joe, have you tried doing this? We can see from the behavior, people start playing around with it and, and seeing what they can do with the system in a way that they don't in the context of an rfp, even though it's like underlying, it's like the same technology underlying. Right? It's just, it's more interactive and that's where we start to get a little bit like, oh man, you know, like we're not, we're not capturing that value. I'm glad they're getting excited because maybe that does then expand the number of people that want access to the system, but we're not getting paid for that usage. And so, you know, I think there's definitely something there for us to work on.
[00:22:39] Speaker C: That's my hunch. And so that the hybrid model of having some usage parameters in there somewhere, again, you don't want 15 different limits. It's just going to drive them crazy. But a couple of key ones in there could be helpful in the next iteration of the model. That makes tons of sense. And I'm glad you're getting momentum and you're closing deals and customers are coming in and you're, you're winning and learning and moving forward. And so speaking of moving forward, let's now focus on the future, right? And don't say if you have a top secret thing on the roadmap, you don't have to reveal that stuff, right? But what's next, what's happening? And maybe you know, as you're conquering this use case, is there a tangential one that revealed itself? What's going on?
[00:23:14] Speaker A: That's a really good question and hard to answer because we've got our long term vision for what we want the system to do. I won't go into the long term vision too much because I think that is a little bit top secret. We've got maybe some kind of ridiculous ambitions there. But in the medium term we want RFPS and similar, similar kinds of document experiences like these just kind of like really slow, hard, difficult, annoying processes. We want it to be like a magic black box where you just stick the thing in and the system knows so much about your company and is so well trained on how you typically respond and what your people do and how they answer these questions that it feels like magic. You just, you stick it in and you get something out at the end and you're like, you know what? Hey, this is pretty close. Like we're, we're, we can work with this with minimal touch. And it's not there yet. And I don't think the underlying technology is there quite yet, but that's where we want to get in the next couple years. And now what that means in terms of, you know, some more specifics is right now we're very narrowly focused on certain kinds of RFPs. Like the questionnaire style, you get these like, you know, like you experience with SaaS probably, right? Not so much like the government contracting style RFPs. It's the same underlying problem but with very different packaging. And so we've got to work on the packaging so that we can cover all the different kinds of things that a company might encounter pretty easily. So that's going to be definitely a near term focus for us. And then, you know, over time I think, okay, I can go a little bit into like the next, the next things. After that we want to start bringing in kind of more context from like a CRM system. So being smarter about like, okay, well we've got an rfp. We've got this opportunity. Let's get beyond the questions on the page, right? We have a ton of information in our CRM about or in Zoom recordings or whatever it is about the specific challenges the customer has. Let's bring that information to bear so that we can like make this response really, really special. Something that's going to stand out, that is going to tell a customer we really get their problems and is not just going to be, is not going to make them just like want to look at the price and move on. Because that's kind of the challenge with an RFP is like actually getting their attention so they don't get bored and jump straight to the price. Right?
[00:25:34] Speaker C: Yeah, which, which I've been on both sides of that. I'll say this, man, like hitting government or hitting like high compliance or highly regulated industries, fintechs and so on, so forth. Different ball game. The RFPs are much more lengthy. They factor in, they have like scoring tables, they have all sorts of stuff going on over there. So it's a whole different, a whole different animal. I did RFPs for not just SaaS, but also insurance companies and banks. They were the worst. Right. And there are hours, maybe days of my life that I will never get back from answering all those damn questions. But if you can solve that and your vision can come to fruition, I think I got a ton of value there. I will say though, that that space tends to be a little less trusting of technology in that sense. And so you got to find a way to angle it in there. But there is a lot of value to be had. And listen, I think that the RFP is not going to go away. Right. And I think there is a sort of. I think from a market perspective, are more folks going to go and manage RFPs now that it's easier, or more folks going to put out RFPS now that we know they can get better responses? Remains to be seen how it kind of shakes out. But I think from the future perspective, your pricing model could see different layers that could start attacking the value that you provide in these different verticals or these different circumstances. Right. And that could be, that could be major. I mean, you're not just making it faster and easier. You might even make their responses better. So that way they win more, which is really what they want. At the end of the day, they're answering so they can win 100. The closer you are to the dollar, the more you can charge for it. And so if you're able to move up to that, that stream and like, well, we're actually winning because of this thing, then that's. I think it's a huge opportunity for you, man.
[00:27:09] Speaker A: Yes, that's the goal.
[00:27:10] Speaker C: I love it. Well, huge lesson on the evolution from that inception stage to figuring out it sounds good on paper, but ain't ain really what we got to do. Keeping it simple, winning, learning, evolving, pushing forward. I think every entrepreneur listening today learned a ton. And so I want to thank you, Peter, for coming in, dropping some knowledge bombs. I do have one More question. I want to send your way, man, because, you know, everybody here is a human just trying to, you know, work with other humans. At the end of the day, Peter, just to give us a little sense of who you are. What was your favorite jam? What was your favorite song growing up? I think you can. You could just listen to it over and over again. What song would you pick?
[00:27:45] Speaker A: I have really varied musical tastes and, and it could be a whole conversation. Talk about me, me and music. I was, I was really into music and I was a pretty serious musician when I was a kid. Song that, from my childhood that blew my mind the first time I heard it and has remained like in the top five all time favorite songs my entire life is Cult of Personality by Living Color.
[00:28:09] Speaker C: Wow.
I haven't heard. That's a new one. Cult of Personality. I know the jam. Very catchy. Very, very catchy and I, I admire that. What is it about that one that blew your mind? Was it. Was it just the. The dexterity in the beats, the rhythm? Was it the song? What was your big.
[00:28:27] Speaker A: I had never heard anything like that. Like, it was combination, first of all, I mean, because Living Color itself is. They won together. So many styles, right? And, and are so genre defying. You know, for me as a kid, like, first of all, seeing, seeing the music video on mtv, that music video was wild. Just, you know, them in spandex, just them playing. I mean, it was insane. And Vernon Reed, his guitar solos, like shredding, but like also kind of like atonal and really just like pushing the boundaries. It was like I could not stop listening to that song. And, and to this day, Living Color is one of my top three favorite bands of all time. I just, I love everything they've ever done. It's just they're. They're amazing. And that was. That song was like, like to, you know, this suburban white kid in Massachusetts in the, in the late 80s, early 90s, like that thing, just that one song and then that album and everything that led me to. Has really opened my eyes to like a whole big world of music. It was amazing.
[00:29:31] Speaker C: See, now I can't get it out of my head here, but that very, very border, I would say pushing and all those boundaries that I think it says a lot, man. Thank you. Thank you for being here and for giving some value back to the SaaS community again. I think they learned a lot. We'd love to have you back if you're willing to come in.
[00:29:48] Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. Love to talk to you again, Marcus.
[00:29:50] Speaker C: Super, super. Thank you. Again Peter Team. That's Peter Bonnie. He is the founder and CEO of Fast Break rfp. Take those lessons that he laid out today, apply them next Monday and get 1% better. Right? And really try to move away from that, from that guesswork and price on purpose. And remember, stop guessing and start growing. Until next time, thank you and much.
[00:30:11] Speaker B: Love for listening to the Street Pricing podcast with Marcos Rivera. We hope you enjoyed this episode. And don't forget to like and subscribe. If you want to learn more about capturing value, pick up a copy of Street Pricing on Amazon. Until next time.
