Let’s play a game.
If Tony is an expert and lives in a place where costs of living are low, should he have a lower price even for global clients?**
In the eyes of some, people who say “keep them low” have a neo-colonialist, rigid, exploitative mindset and should be ashamed of themselves. In the eyes of others, people who say “raise them” have a profit-obsessed, neo-liberal, deceitful outlook and should be ashamed of themselves as well. Oops, the game was rigged from the start._
Sorry about that. Let’s play a different game then._**
If Manfred is a client in continuous need of Tony’s expert services, and after months of great service Tony moves from a low-expense location to a high-expense location, should Manfred tolerate a significant price hike for the same service?**
Most people would not be ashamed to say “no”. The hike in Tony’s living expenses is not really Manfred’s business._
See? A much easier game._
What’s the real difference between games 1 and 2 though? Because clients shouldn’t have it both ways – either our costs are their concern, or they aren’t. Since there is no simple way of making them care when costs rise, in my mind, there is no reason to include them in the discussion when costs drop.
In other words, if you lose a client who can’t take this kind of a hint
It’s probably a client worth losing, as soon as possible.