A productized catalog needs a clear promise for every price. A tiered sequence can help when buyers have related needs at different depths. It also adds work: several offers to explain, deliver, support, and keep current.
The $129, $497, and $1,997 structure in my February 2026 notes is a historical pricing model. This guide keeps that example and its alternatives so the assumptions can be inspected. It uses the current catalog separately and treats retainers as a durable, capacity capped offer alongside the product work.
Start with what each buyer receives
A smaller diagnostic can answer a contained question. A broader investigation can cover more systems and evidence. An implementation offer must describe the actual work and its acceptance condition. A higher price by itself does not turn one category into another.
Write each promise in terms the buyer can compare: inputs, output, turnaround, review, support, and the decision it helps them make. Include the cost of fulfilling that promise. Buyer value and willingness to pay matter, but they do not remove the need for delivery economics.
The current tracking catalog, checked locally on October 23, 2026, includes the $149 CAPI Leak Report, $750 Tracking Truth Map, and $1,500 Attribution Teardown. These are distinct diagnostic scopes. The older $129 / $497 / $1,997 model below is not their current price list or a claim that every buyer should purchase all three.
Compare the catalog shapes
A flat catalog
The original alternative was five or six products around $29 to $79. That can fit buyers who need one independent tool and leave with a complete result. Several products can also reach distinct search questions.
The cost is maintaining several separate promises and finding buyers for each. A shared audience does not establish an upgrade path. Compare the acquisition and support costs of the individual products before assuming that more catalog entries create more revenue.
A single flagship
The second alternative was one offer around $1,497 to $1,997. It gives the operator one main delivery system and one purchase decision to explain. That shape can work when a clear audience already trusts the work, when the outcome warrants that commitment, or when a conversation is a useful part of the purchase.
The risk is concentrating the catalog in one offer. A buyer who needs a smaller answer has no matching entry point. That tradeoff can still be sensible when a smaller product would be distracting or unprofitable to support. A single flagship is a legitimate counterexample to the idea that every business needs a ladder.
A tiered sequence
The third alternative uses independently useful offers at increasing depth. It is worth testing when the buyer's next question follows from the earlier result and each scope can be delivered at its price.
The cost is the work between the tiers. Buyers need to understand the difference, delivery has to support it, and the prices and terms must stay consistent across the site. A wider numerical gap does not guarantee that those differences will be understood.
Historical model per one hundred entry buyers
In February 2026, the example assumed one hundred buyers at $129, eight additional purchases at $497, and two additional purchases at $1,997. Upper purchases are counted as incremental revenue from those same entry buyers. These rates are assumptions for the model, rather than observed benchmarks.
| Purchase | Assumed buyers | Price | Gross sales |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entry | 100 | $129 | $12,900 |
| Middle | 8 | $497 | $3,976 |
| Top | 2 | $1,997 | $3,994 |
| Total | Same entry cohort | Multiple possible purchases | $20,870 |
That is $208.70 of gross revenue per entry buyer, compared with $129 from the entry purchase alone. The difference is $79.70, about 61.8 percent of the entry price. It excludes acquisition cost, refunds, processing fees, support, and fulfillment. The time to collect the later purchases belongs in the cash model too.
Recalculate the sensitivity
Hold the top purchase assumption at two percent and reduce middle purchases from eight percent to four percent. The cohort produces $18,882, or $188.82 per entry buyer. At two percent middle purchases, the same model produces $17,888, or $178.88 per entry buyer. The old source's estimate of roughly $170 for the four percent case was an arithmetic error.
Keep middle purchases at eight percent and reduce top purchases from two percent to one percent. The cohort loses $1,997, which is $19.97 per entry buyer. Both upper rates matter. Their relative effect depends on the prices and rate changes chosen; the example does not prove one is always the most sensitive input.
Changing the entry price changes both the gross receipt and potentially the number and type of buyers. The original notes compared $99, $129, and $199 as possibilities. Model several plausible demand responses instead of assuming that a cheaper entry always brings more useful buyers or that a higher price always triggers a sales call.
Historical interactive models
The illustrations below retain the earlier tier prices and assumptions so the model can be explored. Their prices belong to the historical example. Use the calculations above and the live catalog for the current distinction.
Diagnose weak performance before changing price
If the entry offer gets attention but few purchases, inspect audience fit, the promised result, evidence, purchase friction, and price. A number alone does not explain the conversion rate.
When the middle offer sells poorly, ask buyers what they thought it included. The gap may be scope, timing, overlapping value, delivery credibility, or willingness to pay. A discount is one possible experiment, alongside improving the offer or changing the audience. Keep the result and its uncertainty attached to the test.
A top offer that nobody purchases deserves the same scrutiny. It might help buyers compare the catalog, but it also creates a promise that needs to be real and deliverable. An unbought tier is not automatically earning its maintenance cost through anchoring.
Use a cohort record that can connect the original purchase with later purchases and refunds. Specify the observation window and avoid treating buyers who have not had time to return as permanent nonbuyers. Replace each model assumption with observed data as the sample becomes useful for the decision.
Keep the retainer promise separate
An ongoing retainer can reserve responsibility, decision capacity, implementation, or another agreed continuing scope. A standalone report gives a buyer a defined diagnostic result. Those promises can complement each other.
My earlier replacement and sunset framing was withdrawn in June 2026. Retainers remain a current part of the practice, limited by delivery capacity. The product catalog can expand the practice alongside them. For workload and concentration, read the combined retainer and product guide. Current engagement terms are on availability.
When a diagnostic overlaps an existing agreement, say which work is already included. A higher tier or a retainer should not quietly charge for the same promise twice. Scope any next implementation step from the actual finding.
Frequently asked questions
Are the upgrade rates benchmarks?
They are assumptions in a dated model. Audience, scope, timing, and the work after purchase can change the result. Replace the rates with your own cohort evidence and keep the uncertainty visible.
Does every catalog need three tiers?
A flat catalog or a single flagship can be appropriate. Use a sequence when buyers have related next questions and each offer stands on its own economics.
Should all tiers launch together?
Start with an offer that is useful and deliverable. Let the buyer questions and delivery evidence inform the next scope. A speculative upper tier still creates a support and fulfillment promise.
What if buyers only want the entry offer?
Check whether it already solves their need. An upgrade rate can reflect a satisfied buyer as well as a weak later offer. Learn which explanation applies before changing the catalog.
Do the old prices describe the current products?
The historical model uses $129, $497, and $1,997. Current tracking pages above list $149, $750, and $1,500 for their distinct scopes as of this review.
Does this model replace retainer revenue?
Each offer needs workable economics, while the practice can continue to deliver capped retainers. A model for product purchases does not create a deadline for ending an ongoing engagement.
Sources and specifics
This guide consolidates the February 2026 pricing pattern library and three tier model. The arithmetic is shown directly, including the corrected middle tier sensitivity. Its upgrade rates and pricing psychology were modeling assumptions and working hypotheses, rather than market benchmarks.
Current diagnostic prices were checked against the local product catalog on October 23, 2026. Use the live product pages for current scope and purchase terms. The audit pricing guide covers the cost and value question for an individual offer.