You charged 100 an hour. Now you're considering 80 because an empty calendar earns nothing.
A lower rate might bring work back. Fair enough.
In our work with founders whose businesses have stalled, we review decisions like this. Before changing it, I ask what the client means by “too expensive.”
Sometimes the project is worth doing and the budget is simply short. A lower rate may close that gap.
Sometimes the client has not decided whether the work is worth doing, or what the total bill will be. In that case, changing 100 to 80 does not explain what the hours will achieve or where the final bill may land.
If the concern is that the hours will keep expanding, clarify the scope, estimated hours, and deliverable before offering an even lower number.
The useful question: what specific piece of work is this lower rate meant to make more likely?
Fewer orders explain why you feel pressure to cut your rate. They do not, by themselves, give the client a reason to buy.
Industry data reflects the pressure. The 2026 Freelancer Study for the DACH region found that 9% of respondents planned to lower their hourly rate; among them, 61% cited a lack of orders. The study records an intention to cut rates; it does not show whether orders returned afterward.
Consider this. A client is ready to buy 10 hours of work and has an 800 budget. At 100 an hour, the quote is 1,000; at 80, about 800. If the scope, hours, and budget are real, the lower rate has a concrete reason to help close that deal. It still does not guarantee a signed contract or payment.
But getting the work and improving your income are different questions.
Suppose you used to sell 50 billable hours a month at 100, for 5,000 in revenue. Orders fall and you sell 40 hours, for 4,000.
If those 40 hours can still be billed at 100 and a new client buys 10 additional hours at 80, total revenue becomes 4,800. That may help.
If every new quote is now 80, selling 50 hours again produces only 4,000.
The workload came back. The revenue did not.
If the old-rate work has already disappeared, the 4,800 calculation no longer applies. To get back to 5,000 at 80 an hour, you would need to sell 62.5 hours. That is arithmetic, not proof that those hours exist, and it is before costs.
“Give me a lower rate and I’ll send you more work later” is not revenue. Scheduled or agreed hours is more concrete, but it still has to be delivered and paid for. A one-time discount can become the starting point for the next negotiation.
The market may genuinely have moved to a lower price. Then the service’s economics need another look. One discount will not fix a long-term lack of orders.
Lowering your rate is not automatically a step backward. When cash is tight, a lower-priced job can be worth taking.
The danger is dropping every quote before you can say what extra work the lower rate is meant to bring.
Top comments (2)
The line about hours that keep expanding is the one I'd underline. In my experience "too expensive" from a small client often means "I can't tell where this ends." Dropping from 100 to 80 doesn't answer that. A fixed list of what's in, a rough hour estimate, and one sentence on what happens when something new comes up usually does more than the discount.
The other trap with a discount is that the extra asks show up at the discounted rate too. You take the job at 80 to close it, then the "while you're in there" requests start, and nobody ever agreed whether those are part of the 10 hours. Now you're effectively at 60. If I do cut a rate, I tie it to the written scope: this price covers these things, anything outside them gets quoted separately before I start. It keeps the discount from quietly becoming the new baseline.
Your last question is a good filter. If I can't name the specific job the lower number is supposed to win, I usually keep the rate and offer a smaller scope instead.
The “before I start” part matters. Quoting an addition first gives the client a chance to decide whether it's worth paying for. If that conversation happens after the work is done, it can turn into an argument over an unexpected bill. That's a useful way to protect the working relationship as well as the fee. Thanks for adding that.