A read of 400 survey responses against the 12-month funnel. The qualitative and quantitative evidence point at the same wall: pricing clarity, not price level or product fit.
Grouping the free-text answers, 145 of 400 respondents (36%) named a pricing-related reason they almost didn't proceed — confusion (64), perceived expense (53), or being forced to "talk to sales" (28). It is the single largest theme by a wide margin, and the most-requested fix is literally "a clearer, simpler pricing page" (66 requests). This converges exactly with the funnel: the pricing page is the biggest single-page drop-off at 62% bounce.
×64"The pricing was confusing — I couldn't tell what I'd actually pay."
Most-frequent single verbatim reason
×28"I had to talk to sales and gave up."
Self-serve buyers blocked by a sales gate
×53"Pricing felt too expensive for what I'd get."
Value framed before the value is shown
×66"[I want] a clearer, simpler pricing page."
The #1 thing respondents asked us to build
Of the 145 pricing mentions, 64 are "I couldn't tell what I'd pay" and 28 "had to talk to sales and gave up." That's 92 people blocked by transparency, not by the number. Only 53 said it was genuinely too expensive. Most of this leak is information, not value.
63 almost left because "I didn't know where to start," and "a guided setup checklist" was the single top request (67). This maps to the signup→activation step (only 38.7% activate). Real, but downstream of the pricing-page leak.
Average NPS across respondents is 5.96, and pricing-confused users actually score 6.11 — slightly above average. People aren't churning on a bad product; they're bouncing before they ever experience it. The blocker is at acquisition, not retention.
Contact sales gate on the primary tier in favor of self-serve checkout. A/B vs. the current page, 50/50.