The problem this solves
Pricing decisions carry more revenue weight than almost anything else leadership approves, and they routinely get made on the thinnest evidence in the building. The competitive input is usually a screenshot folder somebody maintains sporadically, plus a memory that a rival raised prices sometime last spring. Pricing pages change quietly, packaging shifts disguise increases, and discounts live off-page entirely, so the picture in the room is a blend of stale captures and secondhand anecdotes.
The analysis leadership actually needs is longitudinal: how did each competitor's pricing and packaging move over the last two quarters, what does the trajectory imply about their strategy, and where does our plan now sit in the field - cheapest, premium, or awkwardly unpriced in the middle. Assembling that from public record is genuine research work, which is why it happens once during a repricing project and never as an ongoing input to the decision it should inform.
A pricing brief with lineage changes the texture of the meeting. Every claim about a competitor's move cites the evidence behind it, the positioning model states its assumptions, and the one-slide summary gives the room a shared picture to argue from. Leadership still makes the call; the call just stops resting on the loudest memory in the room, which is the quiet upgrade every pricing meeting has been waiting for.
How the mission runs
- Reconstruct six months of competitor moves. Web Research works through each of your three named competitors' public pricing record: current pages, archived versions, announcement posts, and packaging changes over the window. The output is a move timeline per competitor, with each entry citing the evidence it was reconstructed from.
- Decode packaging as well as price. Sticker changes are the visible half; the analysis also tracks what moved inside the tiers - features shifting between plans, limits tightening, new gates appearing - because packaging is where pricing strategy actually hides. Each competitor's trajectory gets a strategic reading grounded in their observable moves.
- Model where your plan sits. Your current pricing is placed in the reconstructed field: price position per tier against each competitor, value framing, and where recent moves have shifted the ground beneath your plan. The model states its comparison assumptions plainly, since tier structures rarely align neatly across rivals.
- Write the brief into Google Docs. The brief lands as a Google Doc: the six-month move timeline, the strategic read per competitor, your positioning model, and the decision options with the evidence for and against each. Written for leadership - short enough to be read, referenced enough to be trusted.
- Distill the one-slide Gamma summary. A single Gamma slide compresses the brief for the meeting: the field map, the key moves, and the decision at hand. It exists because pricing conversations happen in rooms with limited minutes, and the doc behind it holds every claim's lineage for whoever wants to pull a thread.
The prompt
This is the exact objective the agent receives. Swap the obvious placeholders for your own domain, segment or channel and run it as-is from the console, Slack, or the API.
What comes back
A leadership-ready pricing brief in Google Docs: six months of reconstructed competitor moves with evidence cited per claim, a strategic read of each rival's trajectory, a model of where your plan now sits with assumptions stated, and framed decision options. Accompanied by a one-slide Gamma summary for the meeting itself, so the room debates the decision on a shared, checkable picture of the field.
Make it yours
- Widen the window to twelve months when a competitor's strategy shift is the real question, since two quarters can read as noise where four read as direction.
- Add a scenario section modeling two or three specific moves you are weighing, with the competitive response each seems likeliest to invite based on the rivals' patterns.
- Re-run it quarterly as a standing pricing watch, so the next repricing conversation starts from an evidence base instead of a research project.
Frequently asked questions
Where does the competitor pricing history come from?
From the public record, reconstructed through Web Research: current and archived pricing pages, announcements, and packaging documentation. Each timeline entry cites the evidence it rests on, and where history is genuinely unrecoverable the brief says so plainly instead of interpolating a guess.
Does the brief recommend a specific price?
It frames options with evidence rather than issuing a number, because a pricing decision folds in margin structure, sales motion, and appetite that live outside the analysis. What it removes is the fog: leadership choosing between framed options on checkable evidence is the intended end state.
How fresh is the analysis by meeting day?
The research runs when the mission runs, so schedule it against the meeting date and the brief reflects the field as of that week. If a competitor moves between delivery and the meeting, a re-run refreshes the timeline and the model without rebuilding anything by hand.