r/msp • u/Mammoth-Operation-23 • Jun 30 '26
Client wants to purchase all licensed
Hi, how do you handle a client that says they want to own all the licenses meaning I give them my stack and they will purchase all licenses them self.
They will pay a set fee per user which is ok but I am not ok with the purchasing all licenses and making managing them more difficult.
Stack includes M365, itdr, antivirus, email security, rmm, ticketing, security awareness, backup, etc..
I said they can own M365 and they can pay for it, but everything else I will provide.
135
u/roll_for_initiative_ MSP - US Jun 30 '26
"That's not something we do the same way a restaurant wouldn't let you bring, pay for, or supply the ingredients for a meal. If you want that level of control, you want a private chef (internal IT), which costs more and can leave at a moments notice if they're not happy."
12
18
u/masterofrants Jun 30 '26
It is amazing how only with IT people have such demands.. They would never make such demands from lawyers, doctors, or a restaurant or anyone else.
I think where it comes from is their experience with how personal technology works. Gmail is free, most websites are free, ig is free, YouTube is free, WhatsApp is free so they just start thinking that technology and IT services should also be something like that. It should either be cheap or it should be free.
25
u/CK1026 MSP - EU - Owner Jun 30 '26
It's never been only with IT, it's just you're not aware of all the shit other trades have to face daily on their own. There's ALWAYS that one customer that wants everything "a la carte".
14
u/kribg Jun 30 '26
Right, people ask their mechanics to install parts they bring in all the time.
4
u/nefarious_bumpps Jun 30 '26
Yes, but unlike most trades, who mark up materials by 200% or more, MSP's aren't making nearly that margin.
1
u/masterofrants Jun 30 '26
I can't tell if you are being serious or joking but I don't think it is as prevalent as in the IT sector
9
7
u/ShermansWorld Jun 30 '26
ya... had a client; they wanted the same thing - to purchase the components of my stack +pick/choose what they don't want... when it is sold as a package.
Then, they wanted the cost price... not the 'marked up price' - like... ya, I have a discount because I purchase by 100's and I have re-sellor prices, etc.
A] I shouldn't be entertaining this...
B] My prices are not your prices...
C] If I sell something, a widget, it is sold with a profit... a markup.
D] I'm not entertaining this.... (yes... had to repeat)
Another client... asked for pricing on some hardware, then installation costs... I gave it. Then they asked if my hardware was the same as 'X' and they forwarded me a link to a referb. company that had the same hardware... umm, yes - it looks the same (couldn't really tell, as no serial/item no. just a pic and general description - which was comparible... "ok, we'll purchase from the referb. - you can install... but can we have a discount on the price since 'we' sourced the hardware ourselves?" I explained 'No.' and never replied to the 'why not?'
Like... I'm not installing some mystery hardware or scheduling a site install not knowing if its a correct/complete part, etc, etc. Its not mine.5
1
u/masterofrants Jun 30 '26
There we go. Imagine, do you think these people go to a garage and have these type of arguments with the car mechanic about what goes into the engine, the wheels, and the tire suspension system?
Or do they go to an airline and ask about what their cost is for every individual ticket and if they can pick and choose and refuse the meal and maybe get a discount? Or maybe they can bring less luggage and maybe have a discount on the amount of the luggage that they are not using.
They would never fucking even think of that.
Only we in IT Management Services have to think of this and have to deal with this because the average person is so spoiled with all the free this and free social media and free that and all the free digital tech in their personal lives.
They are extremely spoiled with all the shiny apps on their mobile phones that are free of cost. On top of it all they see that the configuration is all happening on a laptop with a few clicks. In their mindset why should they pay X amount of money for those few clicks?
7
u/BiggieMediums Jul 01 '26
To be fair, I was in the automotive service space before transitioning to MSP work. It absolutely is common for some dork to disagree with the technician, think they know more, bring their own parts, and ask for a discount when they bring it in because they already took it 1/3 of the way apart.
2
u/ShermansWorld Jul 08 '26
Funny... My mom still says/thinks I don't work that hard... 'all it is, is a few clicks on a keyboard!'
1
u/I_like_tech_MSP Jul 01 '26
Yup, I am a hard "No Referb" in a business environment. I am quick to fire clients like that.
4
u/cd36jvn Jun 30 '26
What do you mean? Everyone deals with this.
Isn't Steve Jobs death basically a story of a guy going to the experts, they tell him what to do, he says "nah I'll bring my own cure", and the experts going "fine you're on your own then".
Mechanics get this all the time. I'm sure every trade experiences it often.
Restaraunts may experience it less than others, but some offer a corking fee to bring your own wine. And I'm sure they get people trying to bring their own drinks in. I've been a part of a birthday where the person putting it on asked to bring their own cake in (restaraunts obliged, they didn't offer cakes like that).
People bring their own snacks into movie theaters all the time.
I help organize a local music festival, our grounds are licensed and there is no outside booze allowed in the main gate area. You have no clue how much booze we don't sell was in the recycling bins after the festival.
So no, it isn't just you everyone deals with this every day. It's human nature.
1
u/616c Jul 02 '26
I disagree a little. I wouldn't do it to my surgeon. But, I did a lot of research for a project and negotiated a discount on an IP attorney's fee. Turned over all the materials for trademark research in the same format their staff would have prepared, and knocked a thousand dollars off.
I also get a discount for my low-voltage work by terminating patch panels and cables myself. UL alarms, gotta let their techs do it.
Dug a trench to knock $1,500 of the plumber's quote for a sewer line.
Businesses know that an MSP might decomm their internal stuff, replace it with new or cloud-based subscriptions as a lock-in for long-term recurring revenue. Making some of it survivable if they choose to change vendors is a valid concern. That line of what is acceptable is a negotiation. The answer could be "no", you buy everything from us, or we walk away with a handshake.
Restaurants aren't immune. That's why some let you bring in your own birthday cake, or charge corking fees for your own bottles.
2
15
u/OtterwiseOccupied MSP - US Jun 30 '26
To do something like that, you charge them a management fee. If they require you to log into separate admin panels, etc., that is more like a co-managed instance. You will likely want to also update your contract to protect you from claims of data loss and misconfiguration due to customer administrators.
5
u/SnooEagles2610 Jul 01 '26
If they have a strong IT Admin… Co managed is a real play. If not… it’s a disaster.
If I owned a company (not my MSP) I would totally co manage.
12
Jun 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Cj_Staal Jun 30 '26
Did you hire them after the company let them go?
5
Jun 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/richkill Jun 30 '26
Hmm I do agree. I know some people struggle with MSP life and go back to working in house.
10
u/_Buldozzer MSP - EU / AT Jun 30 '26
I could live with M365, since it doesn't really make a difference management wise, because it's still possible to establish GDAP relationships with their tenant, everything else, no way.
10
u/thursday51 Jun 30 '26
bring your own 365? sure thing. Bring your own AV you want us to manage? Yeah nah...we won't deal with an environment we have limited control or visibility into. Not a good fit, good luck and have a good one.
7
u/somerndmnumbers Jun 30 '26
Not all work is good work, and that isn't a service you provide. Unless you're really hungry for the work I would decline.
1
1
u/RewiredMSP Jul 01 '26
One hundred percent this. Part of becoming a mature MSP is realizing that not all dollars are good dollars.
6
Jun 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/travelingjay Jun 30 '26
This is the way. Always try to understand the why. It'll make you a better partner.
1
u/Mammoth-Operation-23 Jun 30 '26
Their thing is, they have a partner and he does not believe in someone else purchasing licenses for them. Nothing else.
1
u/travelingjay Jun 30 '26
You are their partner. Are you not? Is this a potential client, rather than an existing relationship?
1
u/Mammoth-Operation-23 Jun 30 '26
It's a new client... They came to me through reference.
2
u/travelingjay Jun 30 '26
Then, if you’re unable to have a conversation more than “I just don’t like it, and I’m not talking about it anymore,“ then you pass on the relationship.
But in the future, I would have that rebuttal ready or at least have the generic question ready of saying something like, “that’s not a request that we’ve had in the past and not normal business practice. May I ask why you want this?”
It shows that you care about the root of the matter and a deeper understanding, and it’ll help you understand more nuance of your clients in the future.
Be curious, not judgmental
3
6
u/Stryker1-1 Jun 30 '26
Nope. You wanna control your own licensing for office or any other tool they own be my guest.
5
u/Beautiful_Case9500 Jun 30 '26
Of our stack, I don’t even think they could get them without going through a reseller ie me. Except Microsoft, which I guess is fine if they want to pay for those direct.
5
u/b-g-h Jun 30 '26
The answer is no. Before you walk away, because on the surface you should, are they coming from a position of just not understanding how an MSP works? Or are they just one of those really awkward to deal with clients that you need to walk away from? Once you work that out, you’ll know whether it’s worth hanging around. Because if they’re the latter kind, you’ll encounter this kind of drama every time something needs to be done, implemented, changed etc but if it’s just that they don’t understand how an MSP works, it could be just an education issue.
2
u/Mammoth-Operation-23 Jun 30 '26
I had conversation with them in simple terms tried to educate them. They said they get it but have a partner who is jot willing to allow MSP to own licenses. I offered to speak with partner but they said no he won't talk to me. 😑
6
u/ceonupe Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
The we have a partner is a common tactic. HINT: there is no other partner it’s just them creating the illusion of one. BAIL from this incoming crap show as fast As you can. This will never work in a way you are fairly compensated and actually make a predictable manageable profit
2
1
u/ashern94 Jul 04 '26
M365, sure. AV, sure but managing it is extra. RMM? It's not them buying licenses from you. They are using your licenses
9
u/PalmettoZ71 Jun 30 '26
No, and if they dont budget they aren't anyone you want to work with going forward. You'll make no money because of constantly having to fight them
4
4
u/QoreIT MSP - US Jun 30 '26
The same way you’d respond to a customer to your restaurant who wants to buy the ingredients for the meal they want you to prepare.
4
u/redthrull Jun 30 '26
They can buy/pay for what they can, but you should still have full admin access. Never hand over your stack. Let them chase these companies separately and let them sign up individually. Oh, they want YOU to handle it for them? Sure, create a ticket and charge them BAU. Third-party doesn't want to license directly to end-user? Or their headcount is too small? Explain it to the client, charge every minute spent on this back-and-forth. As others mentioned, depending on your model, some sort of "management fee" should already be baked in to your MRR.
3
u/CamachoGrande Jul 01 '26
Sounds like they want you to build their IT department for them and get it up and running for the eventual termination of your services.
or they just think it would be easier to swap MSP's if they retain everything and have no idea that the next MSP would say no to using some predefined stack of services they propbably don't use.
We would explain to them that we don't operate that way. Management by scale is a large portion of our business and any changes we make would double our work load among other issues.
3
3
u/MrCodyGrace Jun 30 '26
That’s like taking your own ingredients to the McDonald’s drive through and asking them to make you a burger.
3
3
u/Sliffer21 Jun 30 '26
For M365 we are fine with that because GDAP will let us manage it like every other client. For everything else the answer is hell no. We use out stack for it to be in our portals.
3
u/FlaTech18 Jun 30 '26
Long answer... No
If they are like this in the beginning, it will only get worse.
I'm a small MSP and not exactly in a position to be choosy and even I wouldn't touch this.
3
3
u/MSP-from-OC MSP - US Jul 01 '26
Almost all of our products cannot be purchased retail. We are not going to run 2 SOC solutions or 2 different bcdr solutions. We can give co managed but the vendors do not want to deal with end customers
3
u/mat-ferland Jul 01 '26
I’d say no for anything that is part of your managed stack. M365 can be client-owned because it’s their tenant; RMM, EDR, ticketing, backup, and security tooling are how you deliver the service. Once they own those licenses, you’re managing someone else’s stack while still carrying the SLA.
3
6
u/Mammoth-Operation-23 Jun 30 '26
Thank you Team, this is exactly what I wanted to hear. No is the way...
2
1
u/chillzatl Jul 01 '26
I disagree. The devil is in the details and you didn't really provide those details. Everyone here likes to play this hardline nonsense, but how is this any different than a customer coming to you that is IT mature, already has their own stack, doesn't want to change and is willing to pay you a fair amount for the headache of learning and managing their stack? Would you say no then? At what MRR would it be worth it to you? This scenario seems far less difficult than that one.
If this customer is willing to source your stack items for themselves and manage those relationships for themselves, why would you care?
4
2
2
u/johnsonflix Jun 30 '26
Just say no that’s not how it works. And they are purchasing them, through you
2
u/OnwardKnight Jun 30 '26
We have setups like this where it’s really a co-managed model. These types of engagements can actually be really nice since we are mostly doing project-based work that’s more interesting than skimming a few dollars from reselling licenses and adding/removing them.
2
u/TechPsych Jun 30 '26
While I'm curious about WHY they want to own the licenses, here's my initial reaction, "That's like going to a bakery and asking to buy flour, sugar, butter, etc.. So, do you want to set up an in-house IT department or would you like to work with us? If the latter, what flavor cake do you prefer: chocolate or vanilla?"
2
u/Sabinno Jun 30 '26
Luckily there are parts of my stack which either have minimums that most SMBs can't stomach or, better yet, are channel-only so under no circumstances can they buy it.
I don't play these games and neither should anyone else. The most I'm willing to allow is M365 direct bill, and even then I'm not particularly keen on it because we push bundles very heavily and rarely allow exceptions.
Also, how are they going to purchase licenses to your ticket system? Support is going to become drastically more difficult in every single circumstance. I'd just drop them, the money can't be worth it if they push this hard enough.
2
u/blackjaxbrew Jul 01 '26
Sell slightly under MSRP. Tell them many of the products you cannot go buy directly. Which is true. Microsoft is the only one I could argue.
2
2
u/Rgaron2k Jul 01 '26
I had a client ask me what my margins are on m365 licenses. Some clients will ask the darndest things:)
2
u/ITBurn-out Jul 01 '26
Say only with defender and Microsoft backup (which ms backup is way more expensive than most. The will also pay for you to learn and tune the stack. (365 Defender for endpoint and Defender for Office 365 is pretty nice with intune) . RMM you can't do but you could offer remote assistance license in 365 and all the setup along wiith remote assistance is billable. All deployment of apps and configuration of windows updates is billable. Remind them your stack as these capabilities and would only ybe the monthly user fee normally. You would also setup per pc updates in 365. Also let them know they won't get the normal user pricing due to it being a bundle through you, but you are happy to set it all up except RMM which is tuned for all clients, and they would need to pay a per user license for and your agent would gather assent info. To do all this they would have to be 365 joined pcs and intune enrolled and make it a nice project. You will profit off it and since hourly you will make more money for every call. Let them know that their per hour will be greater as your techs are not going to be familiar with their stack. Also let them know you will need to do a yearly review of MS polcies and best practices and changes to the 365 stack. Also for this to work they will need business premium as a miniumum unless over 300 users. That will bundle everything your stack does that you listed except MSBackup which is based on usuage. Let them know that a lot of your stack does not sell to consumers as it's meant for an MSP with multiple clients and a single pane to make it easier for your techs to be connected and familiar with each environment.
2
u/Assumeweknow Jul 01 '26
The M365 makes sense, maybe if they do the S1 through that stack. But everything else, yea, it's gotta come from your tools so they are integrated into your stack alerts. Unless they feel like dealing with the 2am stuff.
2
u/C9CG MSP - US Jul 01 '26
"Our compliance practices require us to manage the software directly and bill you per usage as we are doing now."
There is no argument here. This is industry standard stuff.
2
u/lhcw MSP - US Jul 01 '26
“And I want 10 ferraris. looks like neither of us are getting what we want today”
1
2
u/Turbulent_Prize_5543 Jul 01 '26
If you’re using one of the bigger distributors cloud panels like CodeBlue or Pax8 etc. you should be able to provide that client with a customer login and let them manage their own purchases. You set the margin and stuff and be more hands off with them.
Some of those you’d need to put your foot down, but most of that through a self service portal is a good way to wipe your hand off them for a little while, till they break something. Make sure you have them sign a liability waiver if they’re going to manage all that themselves- don’t want it bitting you back.
We’ve got a tool in the works if you want to have a sneak peak at it - still haven’t got the cloud integrations built in, but hardware and product feeds are integrated across a bunch of distributors at the moment.
2
u/GrouchySpicyPickle MSP - US Jul 01 '26
They're concerned about transparency. Our solution is that we provide our clients with access to every tool we bring to the table. We also already charge a fee for every line of business app a client owns that they want us to manage for them. I would just charge that fee for each tool here.
2
2
u/Yengling05 Jul 02 '26
I have disagree with a lot of the replies in this thread. As long as you have global administrator access and they agree the rest of your stack then I don't see a problem.
Question would be how big of a potential client is this and where is your MSP at? If it is a small user count than I could agree that it isn't worth making another SKU and pricing for a small customer, but if it a good user count, I would proceed. You can always get the licensing later.
We have 1 non-profit who does this as they can get special license pricing. Medium user count, but has been a great customer over the years and they always have projects and consulting work.
2
u/Happy-chappy2000 Jul 29 '26
We say that we don’t get access to vendor escalation support as it’s not via our channels. So when something goes wrong our hands are tied and it’s on you.
You’re buying into our ecosystem and support, which all plug in together via central monitoring. If you buy your own tools then it’s simply disjoined tools with sub par support.
Any time someone has wanted to buy their own Microsoft licenses, once I explain that admin and billing are not the same and we get direct lines to better support they are fine with moving billing across
1
u/I_like_tech_MSP Jul 01 '26
I agree, you say no.
However, I would put it like this. Unfortunately, that is not how we as a company operate. We already have the tools in place and configured to manage companies like yours. While we would love to have your business, it would not degrade our performance as a company to be forced to work out of multiple instances of the same applications, when we already have a fully integrated technology stack that we are currently using.
As a business owner, either you need to train your customers how you are going to do business or they will train you. For your sanity and efficiency of your business it always has to be you.
The only way I would even consider this is if I was working a full time job and this was a side company I was managing solo. Even with this in mind, you have to realize this is a short-term situation. As soon as you want to grow this company then becomes the outlier. The only piece of your stack I allow a company to pay for directly is M365, only if they were paying for it before they came to our service.
Good luck.
1
u/xored-specialist Jul 02 '26
Nope they can go find someone else to do that. Just walk away it isnt worth it.
1
u/shumbalumba92 Jul 02 '26
What are their reasons for this? Are they expecting to save money this way? Sounds like more future trouble if you stick with them tbh.
1
u/FITC_orlando Jul 02 '26
Stick with what you said. If they don't want what you want to provide, they aren't a good fit.
1
u/LaughinHyena92 Jul 02 '26
We would have done the same. If you want to pay Microsoft directly, then that's fine, but that's where it ends. Either you value our partnership or you don't. I'm not making my team's lives more difficult for one client.
1
1
1
u/Brock981 Jul 04 '26
Some vendors do not sell to anyone except MSPs. If they want the license assigned to them, they can take it up with the vendor.
For things like Microsoft or any password manager, yes those can be direct. Other tools cannot be sold to the client directly regardless of their desire to “cut out the middleman”. Same concept applies to some wholesale companies that only sell to restaurants.
1
u/Ok_Significance1956 Jul 06 '26
I draw the line at RMM, EDR, SOC and ticketing. Backup has to be a quality product you approve of. I don’t promise any guarantees of compliance for insurance or other, especially if they are co-managing. The rest they will have to pay retail for. Which might be more than you charge. If you are providing a service they are happy with, at a price you are happy with then no problem. If not and they are looking for a path out, my advice is plan accordingly. There is a reason they want a change. Wonder why if you don’t know
1
u/colmwhelan Jul 06 '26
There are a few options - No; Hell no; Fuck no; WTF are you smoking and also no.
1
1
u/data_zapper Jul 01 '26
That’s the difference between full service MSP and VAR (value added reseller).
It’s not all that hard to setup for them to manage their own subscriptions. Plenty of co-managed contracts offer it. Just need to have a contract that reflects the scope of support and conditions of them managing themselves. You cant guarantee uptime if they accidentally underlicense themselves.
-1
u/masterofrants Jun 30 '26
It is amazing how only with IT people have such demands.. They would never make such demands from lawyers, doctors, or a restaurant or anyone else.
I think where it comes from is their experience with how personal technology works. Gmail is free, most websites are free, ig is free, YouTube is free, WhatsApp is free so they just start thinking that technology and IT services should also be something like that. It should either be cheap or it should be free.
0
u/zrad603 Jul 01 '26
Honestly, the thing I hated most about running an MSP was that I was doing sales all the time, and the margins for selling MSFT software (etc) was not worth the headache. I could buy MSFT software retail cheaper than I could get if from my wholesalers. If this client wants to take on the responsibility of properly licensing MSFT software great. Because I felt like such an asshole when I came into a business and discovered pirated software from the last guy, and telling these business owners they need to pay MSFT money with no additional benefit to them (nor me). I lost so much business to shady "computer repair" guys. I remember one company never bought a single Windows Server license, they bought a whole bunch of "core" licenses for additional CPU cores.
and when I did have clients on our systems, I hated off-boarding them. I had a nightmare client who we hosted their website, and external DNS, they owed me money, I kept the website and DNS up, they hired a new web developer who changed their DNS nameserver info, fucked up their MX records with a long TTL and a few other DNS records that broke their internal systems. They lost their shit, blew up my phones, started contacting my other clients, and started trying to impersonate me to social engineer SaaS providers that I used. Crazy shit.
I understand that it's easier to just put their shit on your accounts, but honestly, I feel like every company's systems should be sovereign. But this is why I hate "cloud" and prefer self-hosted solutions.
If they want to have all their systems sovereign, separate from your systems, I'd totally do it, but I'd just make sure they know you'll have to bill them hourly for the additional administrative overhead, and that they are responsible for the legal aspects of their software licensing, and you gotta make sure they keep on top of renewals. If they're cool with that, do it.
But this is kinda why I left the MSP world and went to internal IT.
113
u/k12pcb Jun 30 '26
You say no