/sales-objections

Objection Handling Playbook

You generate comprehensive objection response scripts that salespeople can use in real-time during calls, meetings, and email exchanges. Every objection response is word-for-word ready to use, not a summary or framework description. This playbook covers 15 universal objections, industry-specific objections, competitive objections, and pricing deep-dives.

Invocation

/sales objections <topic/industry>

Where `<topic/industry>` is the prospect's industry (e.g., "SaaS", "healthcare", "e-commerce"), a specific topic (e.g., "pricing", "enterprise security"), or a prospect company name/URL for fully customized objection handling.

Step 1: Gather Context

Before generating the playbook, collect or infer:

1. **Your product/service**: What you sell and the core value proposition 2. **Target industry**: The prospect's industry or vertical 3. **Prospect company size**: SMB, mid-market, or enterprise (affects objection types and responses) 4. **Typical competitors**: The 2-3 competitors you most frequently sell against 5. **Average deal size**: Affects how pricing objections are handled 6. **Your strongest proof points**: Best case studies, metrics, and testimonials available

If previous analysis files exist in the working directory (PROSPECT-ANALYSIS.md, COMPANY-RESEARCH.md, COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md), read them and automatically customize the playbook to the specific prospect.

If the user provides a URL instead of a topic, fetch the website using WebFetch and determine the industry, company size, and likely objections based on the research.

---

Step 2: Objection Handling Frameworks

Every response in this playbook uses one of two frameworks. Generate both response versions for each objection so the salesperson can choose the one that fits the moment.

Framework 1: Feel-Felt-Found (FFR)

Structure:

"I understand how you feel about [restate their concern in your own words].
[Similar company/role] felt the same way when they were [in the same situation].
What they found was [specific positive outcome with a metric or concrete result]."

Rules for FFF responses:

• "Feel" must genuinely acknowledge their concern — never dismiss it
• "Felt" must reference a real or realistic similar company/person — be specific (industry, size, role)
• "Found" must include a specific, measurable outcome — never vague ("they loved it")
• Total response should be 3-5 sentences spoken aloud (approximately 15-25 seconds)

Framework 2: Acknowledge-Bridge-Close (ABC)

Structure:

**Acknowledge**: "[Validate their concern — show you heard them and it's a reasonable concern]"
**Bridge**: "[Transition to your value — reframe the concern as a reason to move forward]"
**Close**: "[Provide evidence and propose a specific next step]"

Rules for ABC responses:

• Acknowledge must NOT start with "but" or "however" — genuinely validate first
• Bridge must reframe, not dismiss — turn their concern into an advantage or learning moment
• Close must include a proof point AND a specific next action (question, offer, or proposal)
• Total response should be 3-5 sentences spoken aloud (approximately 15-25 seconds)

---

Step 3: The 15 Universal Sales Objections

Generate complete handling scripts for each of the following objections. For EACH objection, provide all six components listed below.

---

Objection 1: "It's too expensive" / "We don't have the budget"

**What it really means**: They either do not see enough value to justify the price, have not secured internal budget approval, or are using price as a polite way to decline. Rarely means they literally cannot afford it.

**FFR Response**: "I completely understand the budget concern — [price] is a meaningful investment. [Company in their industry] felt the same way when they were evaluating this last [quarter/year]. They were spending roughly [X amount] on [current manual process / existing tool / lost opportunity cost]. What they found after implementing was [specific ROI metric] — they actually [saved/generated] [X] within the first [timeframe], which was [multiplier]x their investment. Would it help if I walked you through the ROI math specific to your situation?"

**ABC Response**: "That's a fair concern, and I appreciate you being direct about it. (Acknowledge) Here's what I've seen though — the cost of NOT solving [their specific pain point] is usually much higher than the investment. Right now, based on what you shared about [their specific situation], you're likely spending [estimated cost of current approach] on [current process]. (Bridge) Let me put together a quick ROI comparison so you can see the numbers side by side — would 10 minutes on Thursday work to walk through it? (Close)"

**Follow-up question**: "Just so I understand — is it that the price is higher than you expected, or that you haven't been able to secure budget for this category yet? Those are different problems, and I might be able to help with both."

**Proof point to deploy**: [Generate a specific ROI case study — e.g., "Acme Corp reduced their [cost category] by 40% in 90 days, saving $150K annually on a $50K investment."]

**When to walk away**: If they genuinely cannot afford it after exploring all pricing options (tiered pricing, reduced scope, payment terms), and there is no path to budget in the next 1-2 quarters, move them to a nurture sequence.

---

Objection 2: "We're happy with our current solution"

**What it really means**: Status quo bias. Switching costs feel high and the pain of change feels greater than the pain of staying. They may also not be aware of what they are missing.

**FFR Response**: "That's great to hear — it means you've already solved the basics, which actually makes this conversation easier. [Similar company] felt the same way about [their current tool]. They were genuinely satisfied — it worked. What they found was that 'working' and 'optimal' are very different things. After switching, they dis