# Obstacles Before Price, Objections After Price

> The same resistance carries little force before the price is named and a lot afterwards. So known hurdles, budget, decision-makers, timing, are defused proactively before the price hits the table.

- Canonical URL: https://www.convios.com/en/methods/obstacles-before-price
- Language version: https://www.convios.com/de/methodik/obstacles-objections
- Status: Convios method toolkit
- Method library: https://www.convios.com/en/methods — Markdown: https://www.convios.com/en/methods.md

## Problem

Your proposals fail late in the process on objections that were entirely predictable: missing budget, a decision-maker who was never involved, a security review no one mentioned. After the price is named, you negotiate from the defensive. Almost every one of these objections would have been a solvable side condition earlier in the conversation.

## Approach

1. Collect your team's recurring objections and sort them into three clusters: circumstances (time, money, fit), other people (partner, decision-maker), self (doubts about one's own follow-through).
2. Address these points systematically before naming the price, decision process, budget range, and time window as normal discovery questions.
3. Anchor statements early (for instance on available implementation time) that you can respectfully return to if hesitation appears later.
4. Assign objections that remain after the price to their cluster and resolve them specifically, instead of arguing generically.

## Example

A typical case: a B2B SaaS vendor keeps losing deals in the week after the proposal, "we need to discuss internally". Analysis shows that in most cases the economic decision-maker was never part of the conversation, and the security review only surfaced after the price. The team moves both topics to the start: who is involved in the decision, what review process is standard, what time window is realistic? Proposals only go out once these hurdles are cleared and the late surprises become far rarer.

## Limits

Proactive defusing must not turn into an interrogation, the questions have to land as consultation, not as a qualification checklist in tone. Some objections are legitimate reasons to decline and should be respected, not "overcome". In formal tenders with a fixed process, the room for early clarification is limited.

## Metric

Share of deals that fail after the proposal on predictable objections (budget, decision-makers, review processes). If that share drops, the front-loading is working.

## Sources

- Banas, Rains: A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory, Communication Monographs 77(3), 2010 — Communication Monographs (Taylor & Francis), 2010 · academic and scholarly literature · supports the underlying mechanism. Establishes the principle of pre-emption: across 54 cases examined, messages that raise and refute counterarguments in advance protect considerably better against later attitude change than merely supportive messages or no preparation at all. (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03637751003758193)
- Alex Hormozi: Sales Was Hard Until I Understood These 9 Concepts, YouTube, 2024 — YouTube (Alex Hormozi), 2024 · practitioner source · describes the method. Carries the specific design: the separation between obstacles before the price is named and objections after it, plus the three recurring groups of objections. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy2k1GdA-9o)
- Primary source: Banas, Rains: A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory, Communication Monographs 77(3), 2010 (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03637751003758193)
- Adapted from: Alex Hormozi ($100M Offers/$100M Leads, YouTube-Langform)

## Related

- Method: [3A Closing (Acknowledge, Associate, Ask)](https://www.convios.com/en/methods/3a-closing)
- Method: [MEDDIC / MEDDPICC](https://www.convios.com/en/methods/meddpicc)
- Method: [Minimizing Need-to-Believes](https://www.convios.com/en/methods/need-to-believes)