Reduction to the Ridiculous

by Graham Denton

Although Tom Hopkins and others describe the "reduction to the ridiculous" technique as a type of close, it's really a means of deflecting a particular objection, which if successful can position you for a close. Whatever name you give it, here's how it works.

The customer raises the most common of all objections: "Your price is too high." Assuming that you're not simply being undercut by a lower bidding competitor, and that what you're offering does represent good value for the money, consider walking the customer through the following exercise.

Step one: Determine the difference between your price and the price to which the customer would give serious consideration. "I appreciate your concerns about the overall cost, Ms. Spencer. Could you tell me about how much over your anticipated budget our price is?" Let's say she gives you a figure of $5000.

Step two: Determine the time span over which the customer would anticipate using your product or solution if you could converge on an acceptable price. Suppose you're selling telecommunications systems. The "span of use" might then be measured in several years. Say she agrees that her company would anticipate using your solution for at least five years.

Step three: Divide the "budget overage" by the "span of use," to come up with an annual "too much" figure. In this case that figure would be $1000.

Step four: Divide this figure further into monthly, weekly, and finally daily increments, so that the customer can understand the "daily investment" that agreeing to buy your solution will cost her firm. That figure of course always will be significantly lower than the overall investment, and in most cases -- if you've depreciated the cost over a five-year period, for example -- it may be made to look almost "ridiculously" low. For the example used here, the $5000 "too much" figure translates into a daily payment of two dollars and seventy-four cents.

Step five: Make the case for purchase by comparing this daily figure to the extended use that the customer will get from your solution. "Given the expectation that your company will benefit from this system for at least five years, Ms. Spencer, do you still think that $2.74 a day is really too much?"

Ms. Spencer may or may not agree with your logic. There may be other, hidden reasons for her reluctance to adopt your solution: We've all seen price thrown up as a smoke screen for other concerns. But if price really is the issue, this can be an effective technique because it invites the customer, rationally, to make a comparison between a modest daily outlay and a long-term benefit. If your company is able to offer an extended financing period, so much the better. Depreciated over five years, that $5000, for example, comes out to a monthly payment of eighty-three dollars. But even if such financing is not part of the package, the "reduction to the ridiculous" is still a thought-provoking challenge.

It's also one of the few objection-handling devices that have stood the test of time. Salespeople who now are retired will recall having used it thirty, forty, or fifty years ago. At that time, it was sometimes called the "Coke" or "cup of coffee" close because you could reduce most customers' price objections to the cost of those items. "Isn't the enjoyment you'll get from your new Buick worth the cost of an extra cup of coffee per day?"