Stop Asking "Does That Make Sense" - The Trial Close Questions That Get Deals Done

The Most Common Trial Close Is One of the Worst Questions You Can Ask

I see it constantly - salespeople who think they are running trial closes when they say things like "does that make sense?" or "what questions do you have?" after their demo.

Sales trainer Chris Orlob, who helped scale Gong from under $200k ARR to over $200M ARR, called those out publicly as the two worst questions you can ask during a sales demo. The post earned nearly 300 likes and 189 comments from B2B practitioners who agreed.

Those questions are weak, and every major competitor article teaching "trial close" techniques uses "does this all make sense?" as their example. Your competitors are teaching you to ask the question that top salespeople say you should never ask.

This article covers what a trial close is, why the common examples fail, and what the reps hitting 30-65% close rates are asking instead.

What a Trial Close Is (and What It Is Not)

A trial close is a question, not a pitch for commitment. Asking for the sale comes later. It is a question designed to surface where the prospect stands, without forcing a yes or no that ends the conversation.

Think of it as a temperature check with teeth. You ask something that requires the prospect to reveal their honest reaction. Their answer tells you one of three things: they are ready to move, they have an objection you need to handle, or they are not qualified and you should find out now.

That last outcome is the one most reps ignore. A trial close that surfaces a fatal objection is the most valuable thing that could have happened. It saves you from running a full sales cycle on a deal that was never going to close.

The difference between a trial close and a hard close comes down to what you are asking for. A hard close asks for a decision. A trial close asks for an opinion. "Would you like to move forward today?" is a hard close. "Based on what you have seen so far, how does this compare to what you are doing now?" is a trial close. One ends the conversation. The other deepens it.

Why "Does That Make Sense" Fails Every Time

When you ask "does that make sense" you are essentially asking the prospect to tell you whether you explained something clearly. It puts the burden of comprehension on you, not on them.

Prospects almost always say yes. Not because they are ready to buy. Because saying no means admitting they did not understand, which feels uncomfortable. So you get false positives constantly. You walk away thinking the demo landed. They walk away with unresolved doubts they never voiced.

The same issue applies to "what questions do you have?" It is too open. In my experience, prospects come in with feelings, concerns, vague hesitations - not a prepared list. Asking for questions gets you silence or surface-level stuff. It does not flush out objections.

One commenter on Orlob's LinkedIn post said it well: "Does that make sense" makes the other person feel a little odd and you really learn nothing from it.

The fix is straightforward. Replace opinion-confirming questions with contrast questions and future-pacing questions. More on those below.

The Five Types of Trial Close - Mapped to Deal Stage

Each type of trial close serves a different purpose. Using the wrong type at the wrong time is almost as bad as using none at all. Here are the five types that show up in B2B deals, and when each one belongs.

1. The Contrast Trial Close

This one is most effective immediately after you demo a specific feature or workflow. The question forces the prospect to compare what they just saw against what they are doing today.

Example: "How does that compare to how you are handling this right now?"

The psychology here is important. Value comes from contrast. A feature means nothing in isolation. It only means something when the prospect can see what they just saw sitting next to what they do today. When they see that, the value lands without you narrating it.

Orlob's framework makes this explicit. Ask "how are you doing this workflow today" right before you demo it. Then ask "how does this compare to how you were doing it" right after. That sequence does more selling than any pitch slide you could show.

2. The Temperature-Check Trial Close

Use this when you want to gauge overall progress without asking for a commitment. It works at any stage but it is especially useful in the middle of a demo or after a discovery call.

Examples:

"To what degree is this resonating with you so far?"

"To what extent do you see this solving the [specific problem they mentioned]?"

Both of those are from Orlob's list of ten questions that replace "does that make sense" - and both have a structural advantage. Phrasing a close-ended question as "to what extent" makes it open-ended. The prospect cannot just say yes. They have to say something real.

3. The Objection-Flushing Trial Close

This is the most important type and the one most reps skip. You run it right after the demo, before you ever mention price.

The exact question comes from a practitioner on r/sales who used it to raise his close rate from 13% to 30%:

"Based on what you have seen, is there anything that would prevent you from moving forward if the price was right?"

This question produces one of three outcomes. First, the prospect gives you a real objection. You handle it. Now it is resolved before pricing ever comes up. Second, they say nothing is stopping them. That creates natural momentum and makes the pricing conversation easier. Third, they reveal they are in shopping mode or not decision-ready. That saves both of you months of wasted time.

Ask the prospect if anything would stop them from moving forward. They are still teaching you to ask "does this all make sense" while practitioners running 30% close rates are asking something entirely different.

4. The Assumptive Trial Close

This one works by presupposing the next step. Instead of asking whether the prospect wants to move forward, you ask about something that would only matter if they were moving forward.

A practitioner in home services documented going from low single-digit close rates to roughly 70% close rates on qualified calls using this method. The specific question: "When we come out for the treatment, we will need to drill near the stem wall. Would it be possible to have these items moved by the time we arrive?"

When the prospect says yes to moving the items, they have already accepted the premise that the appointment is happening. It is not deceptive. It is just psychologically more effective than asking "so would you like to schedule?" The commitment is smaller and more concrete, which makes it easier to say yes to.

Assumptive trial closes work best when the prospect has already shown strong interest but has not explicitly committed. You are not tricking anyone. You are removing resistance from a decision they are already leaning toward.

5. The Future-Pacing Trial Close

This type asks the prospect to put themselves inside the future state your product creates. It is useful for getting decision-makers who will not actually use the product to understand its value.

Examples:

"How do you envision your team using this?"

"To what extent do you envision this being useful in your situation?"

When a senior leader answers that question, they are doing something important. They are voicing the benefits in their own words. People are far more committed to ideas they generated themselves than ideas someone else pitched them. Getting the prospect to articulate the value is more persuasive than any feature you could show them.

The Post-Demo Question That Changed Everything

Of all the trial close frameworks in this article, the objection-flushing question deserves its own section because it solves a problem I watch reps run into constantly - finishing a demo without ever uncovering what the prospect is actually worried about.

Here is what usually happens after a demo. The rep finishes. The prospect says it looks interesting. The rep sends a proposal. The prospect goes quiet. Fourteen follow-up emails later, the deal is dead with no explanation.

What killed it was an objection that was never surfaced. The prospect had a concern. The rep never asked. The concern sat there and hardened. The deal died quietly.

The fix is asking the objection-flushing question before you send anything. "Based on what you have seen, is there anything that would prevent you from moving forward if the price was right?"

Here is why it works so well. It separates pricing from everything else. If the prospect says "no, nothing is stopping us" and then objects to price later, you have a stronger position. You already got them to confirm no other objections exist. Price becomes the only remaining variable. That is a very different negotiation than one where objections are scattered and unstated.

If they name a real objection, you handle it right then. Not two weeks later in an email thread. Right then, while you still have their attention and can respond in real time.

The practitioner who documented the 13% to 30% close rate improvement was not doing anything complicated. He added one question at the end of his demo and stopped sending proposals into silence.

Trial Close Timing - When to Use Each Type

Timing matters almost as much as the question itself. Here is how to sequence them across a typical B2B sales call.

Before the Demo Starts

Set the frame before you show anything. Orlob's call structure does this well. Set an objective for the meeting, not just an agenda. Then set the decision to be made at the end of the call.

The exact language: "By the end of this call, it would be a win if we are both in a position to decide whether it makes sense to take a next step, or that it does not and we can revisit another time."

That sentence alone changes the close rate on demo calls. You have now made it normal to talk about next steps at the end. The prospect expects it. There is no awkward pivot. The frame is set.

During the Demo

Run contrast trial closes and temperature-check trial closes after each major feature or workflow. Do not wait until the end to check engagement. Check it in real time.

"How does that compare to how you are doing this today?" after each workflow.

"To what extent do you see this solving the [problem they mentioned in discovery]?" midway through.

These questions keep the conversation moving. They also give you real-time data on which parts are landing and which are falling flat.

Immediately After the Demo

Run the objection-flushing trial close here. Every time. Before pricing. Before next steps. Before anything else.

"Based on what you have seen, is there anything that would prevent you from moving forward if the price was right?"

Handle whatever comes up. Then move to pricing and next steps.

At the End of the Call

Finish with a future-pacing question or a direct close, depending on what the signals show. If all objections are handled and the prospect is engaged, this is where you ask for the next concrete step.

"What would need to happen on your end to move forward?" is a clean close that puts the process in their hands while still asking for commitment.

The Frame Battle Most Reps Lose Without Knowing It

Sales training skips the psychology underneath all of this. Closing is partly a frame competition. Whoever holds the frame controls the pace and direction of the deal.

When a rep asks "does that make sense" or "what questions do you have" they are signaling approval-seeking behavior. They are asking the prospect to evaluate them. That is a low-status move. It hands the frame to the prospect.

When you ask "how does this compare to what you are doing today" you are not seeking approval. You are guiding a comparison. That is a different energy. You are the expert leading them through an evaluation, not a vendor hoping they liked your demo.

This is also why the Sandler "Pendulum Technique" works as a trial close framework. The idea is that prospects sit at three positions. At 9 o'clock they are defensive and closed off. At 6 o'clock they are neutral. At 3 o'clock they are open and ready to move. I watched rep after rep torch deals this way - pushing from 6 to 3 with pressure. The Sandler method does the opposite. It pulls back toward 9 first.

The language sounds like: "Maybe we are not the right fit for what you need right now. What do you think?"

That move creates internal momentum. When you take pressure off, prospects often self-qualify in. They become the one pushing toward 3 o'clock instead of the rep. You end up closing the deal because they convinced themselves, not because you pressured them.

This is also the psychologically correct response to a tire-kicker. Instead of chasing them, you give them an easy exit. Prospects who are genuinely interested will resist the exit. Prospects who are not will take it. Both outcomes save you time.

ACV-Specific Guidance - Enterprise vs SMB

Trial closes should work differently depending on deal size.

For SMB deals under $10k ACV, the goal of the trial close is speed. Surface objections fast. Qualify out fast if it is not a fit. One practitioner documented dropping from 90 calls per month to 30 qualified calls per month and going from a 7% close rate to 65%. The volume of activity fell. The win rate tripled. The trial close in SMB is mostly about ruthless qualification.

For enterprise deals over $50k ACV, the math is different. One deal can be worth a year of SMB volume. The trial close in enterprise is not about qualifying out. It is about surfacing hidden objections before they kill a deal you should win.

A real example from r/sales illustrates this. A rep was close to disqualifying a prospect who seemed like a tire-kicker. Instead of cutting them loose, the rep looped in other business units within the same company. What looked like a small deal became a $1.2 million close. The trial close question "is there anyone else on your team who deals with this problem" did more work than any objection-handling script.

The general rule: if your average deal is under $15k, trial closes are a qualification tool. If your average deal is over $50k, trial closes are a stakeholder-mapping and objection-surfacing tool. The questions look similar. The goal is stakeholder mapping in one case and qualification in the other.

Close Rate Benchmarks From Real Practitioners

There is a lot of made-up benchmarking data floating around about close rates. Here is what real practitioners have posted publicly.

In practitioner discussions, the "before" baseline comes up repeatedly in the 13% to 15% range - before any process changes. This comes up repeatedly in practitioner discussions as the "before" baseline.

A 30% close rate is a realistic target after implementing structured trial closes and better qualification. The r/sales practitioner who added the objection-flushing question went from 13% to 30%. It came from adding one question to an existing demo process.

A 40% close rate is publicly cited by practitioners as excellent. A roofing sales operation posted this number as a benchmark worth celebrating, and it earned significant engagement from others in field sales.

A 65% close rate is achievable but typically requires a qualification overhaul, not just better closing questions. The practitioner who hit 65% got there by cutting unqualified demos from their calendar entirely. Fewer calls, better outcomes.

The pattern across all of these data points is the same. Earlier objection surfacing moves the number. So does tighter qualification. Trial closes that flush out objections early are the mechanism that drives both.

What to Say When the Trial Close Gets Silence

Silence is not a no. It is information. When you ask a trial close question and get silence, I watch reps panic and fill it. Do not. Silence means the prospect is thinking. Let them think.

Name what you are observing. "It feels like something is on your mind" or "I get the sense I might be missing something for you" invites them to surface whatever is holding them back.

Orlob's approach to this is direct: if you sense something is wrong in a deal and you do not call it out, that deal is about to go south. The best move is to name the exact thing you hope is not happening. "If I am reading you right, it feels like I am starting to miss the mark with you."

That level of directness is rare in sales calls. It is also what builds trust fast. Prospects know when a rep is sidestepping something. When you name it instead, you signal that you are more interested in a real conversation than in pushing a deal through.

The One Trial Close That Works in Email

I see it constantly - trial close content focusing exclusively on live calls. But email sequences can carry trial close logic too.

The follow-up email after a demo that never got a response is a common place where deals die. The standard follow-up is a nudge: "Just checking in on the proposal." Signaling desperation, that bump is not a trial close.

A trial close in email looks different: "Based on what we walked through, what would need to change for this to make sense for your team right now?"

That question does two things. It assumes there is a reason for the silence (which there always is) and it asks the prospect to name it. You either get a real answer and a path forward, or you get confirmed silence and you can stop chasing. Either way you have more information than "just checking in" ever gave you.

One agency operator documented a situation where improving the specificity of this kind of follow-up message led to a significant uptick in responses from a cold list. The emails stopped asking "any thoughts?" and started asking prospects to name the specific obstacle. Open rates on one campaign hit 71% - but it was the response rates that changed when the question itself changed. A meeting-booking reply came in only after the email started asking a real question instead of nudging.

Using Trial Closes to Protect Your Pipeline

One of the most underrated uses of the trial close is pipeline hygiene. Deals that look active but are dead are the biggest drain on rep productivity. A trial close question asked at the right time will either accelerate a live deal or expose a zombie deal so you can kill it and move on.

The question that does this best: "What would need to be true for us to move forward in the next 30 days?"

A prospect who is genuinely interested will give you a concrete answer. They will name the steps, the stakeholders, the timeline. A prospect who is stringing you along will give you a vague non-answer or go quiet. Both outcomes are useful. One moves a deal forward. The other clears your pipeline of noise so you can focus on deals that can close.

Productivity in B2B sales does not come from running more calls. It comes from running fewer calls on better-qualified deals. The practitioner who went from 90 calls per month to 30 qualified calls did not work less. He worked on better deals. The trial close is the mechanism that makes that happen.

If you want to fill your pipeline with qualified prospects before trial closing them, Try ScraperCity free - you can search by title, industry, company size, and location to find contacts worth running a real sales process on.

The Reps Who Are Not Using Trial Closes - And Why

High engagement content on sales Twitter shows that 62 out of every 97 well-liked sales posts are about what not to do. Anti-pattern content gets more engagement than prescriptive advice. I see it in the comments every time - reps recognizing themselves in the mistakes.

The most common posts that resonate: always be closing is a rookie mistake. Talking too much is a rookie mistake. Asking for permission is a rookie mistake. And filling silence - that one cuts deep because it looks like enthusiasm but it's pure nerves.

The common thread in all of those is approval-seeking. Reps who are anxious about the deal reveal it through behavior. They talk more to fill silence. They soften their questions to avoid pushback. They ask "does that make sense" because it feels safe. None of it works.

The reps with 30-40% close rates have a different posture. They ask direct questions. They name what they observe. They treat a no as information rather than failure. Trial closes are easy for them because they are not asking permission. They are gathering data.

The questions in this article work because they come from curiosity, not anxiety. If you ask "is there anything that would prevent you from moving forward" while secretly hoping the prospect says no, they will feel that energy. Ask it because you genuinely want to know the answer, good or bad.

Putting It Together - The Trial Close Sequence That Works

Here is the complete sequence used by the practitioners showing the strongest close rate data.

Step one: Before the demo, set the frame. Name the objective of the call and tell the prospect you will both be in a position to decide on a next step by the end.

Step two: During the demo, after each major workflow, ask a contrast question. "How does that compare to what you are doing today?" Let them answer fully. Do not cut them off.

Step three: At the midpoint, run a temperature check. "To what degree is this resonating with you so far?" Adjust based on the answer.

Step four: Immediately after the demo ends, before pricing, ask the objection-flushing question. "Based on what you have seen, is there anything that would prevent you from moving forward if the price was right?" Handle whatever surfaces.

Step five: Move to pricing only after step four is complete. The pricing conversation is cleaner because the hidden objections are gone.

Step six: Close with a concrete next step. "What would need to happen on your end to move this forward?" or "If the numbers work, are you in a position to make a decision by the end of the month?"

That sequence does not require a script. It requires listening and asking real questions at the right moments. The reps running 30-65% close rates are not saying magic words. They are running a process that surfaces information early and handles it while they still have the prospect's attention.

FAQ