.png)
Frameworks, core principles and top case studies for SaaS pricing, learnt and refined over 28+ years of SaaS-monetization experience.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In the world of software development, one of the most critical decisions teams face is whether to build a solution in-house or purchase an existing product. This "build vs. buy" dilemma isn't just a technical consideration—it's a financial one that can significantly impact a company's bottom line and development roadmap.
As SaaS providers, understanding how developers evaluate your pricing against their internal build costs is crucial for positioning your product effectively. Let's explore how developers approach this comparison and what you can do to make your pricing more compelling.
The Developer's Cost Calculation Process
Developers typically follow a structured approach when comparing external solutions to internal builds:
Initial Development Costs
When evaluating whether to build in-house, developers first estimate the resource investment required:
- Developer hours: The number of engineers needed multiplied by hourly rates and estimated project duration
- Infrastructure setup: Servers, databases, and other technical components
- Project management overhead: Time spent planning, coordinating, and tracking progress
- Quality assurance resources: Testing time and tools
According to a Forrester Research study, companies typically underestimate internal development costs by 50-200%, with most failing to account for all the peripheral resources required beyond pure coding time.
Ongoing Maintenance Burden
The calculation doesn't stop at launch. Developers factor in long-term costs:
- Bug fixes and security patches: Regular maintenance that diverts resources from other projects
- Feature enhancements: Continuous improvement to meet evolving needs
- Technical debt management: Refactoring and modernizing as technologies evolve
- Documentation and knowledge transfer: Particularly important as team members change
Opportunity Cost Considerations
Sophisticated development teams also evaluate what they're giving up by allocating resources to build rather than buy:
- Delayed time-to-market: What revenue or competitive advantage might be lost while building?
- Core vs. non-core functionality: Is this a differentiating feature worth building, or a commodity function?
- Team focus dilution: What higher-value projects are being delayed or compromised?
How Your Pricing Is Scrutinized
When developers examine your SaaS pricing against their internal build cost estimates, they typically look at:
Total Cost of Ownership Analysis
- Subscription duration: How many months or years of your service equals their build cost?
- Implementation and integration expenses: What additional costs beyond your subscription price will they incur?
- Training and adoption costs: How much will it cost to get their team proficient with your solution?
Value-Added Factors That Offset Pricing
Smart developers recognize that pricing comparisons go beyond simple dollar amounts:
- Reliability and uptime guarantees: What would it cost them to match your 99.9% uptime?
- Security compliance: How much would they spend to achieve similar security standards?
- Continuous improvement: The value of getting regular updates without additional development effort
Making Your Pricing More Compelling in Cost Comparisons
To position your pricing advantageously in build vs. buy analyses:
Transparency in Pricing Structure
- Provide clear, predictable pricing that helps developers make accurate comparisons
- Avoid hidden fees that might emerge later and damage trust
- Offer ROI calculators that help quantify the full value proposition
Highlight Total Value Beyond Feature Parity
Help developers understand the full scope of what they're getting:
- Emphasize ongoing innovation that would be costly to match internally
- Showcase reliability statistics and what it would take to build equivalent infrastructure
- Document responsive support that would require additional staffing internally
Address the Hidden Costs of Internal Builds
According to research by Gartner, internal software projects exceed budget by an average of 27%. Help developers account for often-overlooked factors:
- Documentation and knowledge management requirements
- Distraction from core business priorities
- Risk of key developer departures during or after the project
- Compliance and security updates
Real-World Cost Comparison Case Study
A mid-size e-commerce company recently evaluated building their own payment processing system versus adopting a third-party solution. Their initial estimate for internal development was approximately $175,000, with ongoing maintenance projected at $60,000 annually.
The third-party solution they considered charged $36,000 annually plus transaction fees. While the five-year projection showed a slight cost advantage for building in-house, the company ultimately chose the third-party solution after accounting for:
- The opportunity cost of diverting three developers for six months
- Regulatory compliance expertise built into the third-party solution
- Risk reduction for a business-critical function
- Immediate availability versus a six-month development timeline
Conclusion: Winning the Cost Comparison Battle
When developers compare your pricing to internal build costs, they're making a complex calculation that goes far beyond simple dollar amounts. By understanding their evaluation process and directly addressing the multifaceted nature of the build vs. buy decision, you can position your SaaS offering more effectively.
The most successful SaaS companies don't just compete on price—they demonstrate superior value by highlighting the true comprehensive costs of internal development and the often-underestimated ongoing burden of maintenance and enhancement.
By transparently addressing cost comparison concerns and providing tools that help developers make accurate pricing justifications to their stakeholders, you'll find more customers recognizing that your solution represents not just a purchase, but a smart investment.