The Hidden Surprise in Microsoft Software Assurance

 I have a confession to make...I am revisiting one of my old blog posts. But, when you've been blogging on a topic for over 14 years you would be amazed at how "everything old...is new again" and that applies particularly to Microsoft Software Assurance (SA).

Software Assurance (SA) is known by many as an upgrade and added benefits plan that gets added to a license when it is purchased (if you purchase SA or for any software license purchases made on an Enterprise Agreement). It includes a number of benefits but of particular interest is License Mobility on application servers (such as Microsoft SQL Server) which is the benefit that can help control the number of licenses required in a virtualized setting.

But what you may not know is that Software Assurance (SA) essentially refreshes your underlying license every time you renew. So, the license you bought in 2005 for Microsoft SQL Server (and maintained with SA) will get renewed yet again at your next renewal - to the most current Microsoft Product Terms.

Why is that important?  Typically the licensing rules that apply to software is dependent upon the version you have installed.  However; even if you have an old version installed (like Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise 2005) if you renewed SA on that server in 2020 then you need to apply SQL Server 2019 licensing rules to that install.

This may lead you to want to not have SA on an older server - that is fine if it is a standalone server (physical server or a virtual server that is not allowed to move between hosts) but if not, chances are you require the benefits of SA to be appropriately licensed.

Questions on your licensing and SA - let us know and we'll be happy to help.

Deploying Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus - Important Licensing Information Before You Start

Several of my clients are starting their implementation of Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus and I'm seeing a key misperception that could lead to expensive license compliance issues down the road.

Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus is licensed per user (Yeah! Something many of us have wanted for years) but Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2016 (or 2013, 2010, 2007, etc) is licensed per device. 

The change to "per user" licensing is one of the key reasons many organizations have licensed the Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus, but by using the incorrect installation bits a company can quickly become out of compliance.

These are two different products - they may contain the same feature set but just like you cannot install Microsoft Office Standard when what you own is Microsoft Office Professional, you also cannot install Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2016 when what you own is Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus!

In order to maintain compliance (and benefit from the "per user" licensing) you need to make sure that any deployments of Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus are done with the Office 365 bits, not the volume (or otherwise provided) licensing bits for Microsoft Office Professional Plus.  While years ago there was a short-term exemption to this requirement that exemption has since expired and if you install with Microsoft Office Professional Plus bits then you are installing a device based license.

This information used to be spelled out in the Microsoft licensing briefs but in my latest search I could no longer find reference to it, however; the thing to remember about Microsoft licensing is that they only tell you what you can do - not what you cannot do so the absence of this clarification does not mean they've changed the requirement. This Microsoft TechNet article on "Getting started guide for deploying Office 365 ProPlus" provides some guidance to consider.

While I have not seen Microsoft actively auditing on this yet, you should expect that in the not too distant future it will probably become a compliance item so if you are planning your rollout now, it will pay to do it under the correct installation media.  Also,  your Microsoft Account team is presently financially interested in your Office 365 usage, something that cannot be measured if you are using the Microsoft Office Professional Plus bits.

Example of impact: A user has 3 dedicated devices with Microsoft Office installed (workstation, home, laptop).

• If all of these are installed using the Office 365 ProPlus bits then the company only needs to license the user for some form of Office 365 ProPlus. 
• However; if each of these is installed with the Microsoft Office Professional Plus bits then each install would have to have it's own license requiring the procurement of 2-3 licenses (2 if the laptop could be covered under Portable Use Rights but that is dependent upon how the license for the workstation was acquired).

So, in summary - do not use your Microsoft volume licensing MSI's for Office Professional Plus to deploy you Office 365 ProPlus.  It could end up costing your organization unnecessarily!

As a side note, for those organizations getting ready to deploy Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus 2016 please be aware that there is currently an issue with volume licensed versions of Microsoft Visio 2016 or Microsoft Project 2016 installed on the same computer (as well as 2013 versions of Visio Pro for Office 365 or Project Pro 365). For more details please refer to this Microsoft TechNet article (scroll down to the topic "Visio and Project versions that can be installed on the same computer with Office 365 ProPlus").

Update January 27, 2016 - I have been informed by Microsoft that there is a resolution planned in February 2016 for the above point about volume licensed versions of Visio 2016 and Project 2016. It is planned to come in the form of a "Click to Run Compatible Bits" (C2R-P) for the volume licensed Visio and Project. Keep your eyes open for these updated bits.

Microsoft Next Generation Licensing Agreement (NGVL and MPSA)

A light buzz is going around the Microsoft licensing world about the NGVL (Microsoft Next Generation Volume Licensing) and a new agreement called MPSA (Microsoft Product and Services Agreement). I mention both terms because many of the resellers I've talked to have often known that NGVL was available but thought the MPSA wasn't or vice versa.  This confusion should rapidly diminish but for now, find that it helps for clarification.

The NGVL and MPSA has been available for some time and the beauty of it has been that unlike the Microsoft Select Plus Agreement it allows for online subscriptions.  The bad part was that it didn't allow for Software Assurance purchases.

As of September 2, 2014 Microsoft now allows for purchases of Software Assurance under the MPSA.

It has been a long time since Microsoft has really created a new licensing agreement (the Microsoft Select Plus was in my opinion more of a re-write of the Microsoft Select Agreement) and frankly their offerings have changed substantially during that time so the old agreements were having to be "massaged" to work with current offerings.

Basically the MPSA has many pluses, but the contract language also leaves me very uncomfortable around certain areas - so if you're looking to update your Microsoft agreements take a good look at this agreement but be sure to read the contract carefully and negotiate terms you can actually live with.

The MPSA is designed to cover all products you buy from Microsoft; perpetual licenses, software assurance, subscriptions and services.  That's great and can really provide you with streamlined management but the problem is whenever you lump disparate products together the contract language can get messy.

For example, if you think of your classic "services agreement" and compare that to your "software licensing agreement" there are many things you will accept for packaged software (such as warranty) that doesn't fit what you would require from your consulting services agreement.  However; in this contract they are the same (but they did provide a way around it...you just have to make sure you're aware of it and follow through on it when you're executing the work orders).

Audit clauses have also been updated - this is a subtle change that has happened over the years in the Microsoft Master (Business or Services) Agreement taking out the wording that required them to use a major auditing firm in performing an audit...in my opinion this lays the ground for them to be able to use any Microsoft Partner to perform audits, I don't necessarily feel that change is advantageous to companies.

I'll be going into further details in a later posting but wanted to give an initial "heads up" for anyone thinking of either signing an MPSA or who's in the middle of determining their Microsoft licensing strategy and were unaware that there is a new player on the field that might offer them substantial benefits.

As always, if you are looking at your Microsoft licensing strategy or are considering signing a new agreement with Microsoft (or are being audited under an existing one) it's a good time to get some expert help from an independent third party. I live and breathe Microsoft licensing (I know...but what can I say - we love puzzles!) and am happy to help - contact me to find out how we can help you.

Renewing Microsoft Software Assurance - Know the Implications

Upgrade rights are included but so are updated rule requirements

 A frequently misunderstood area of Microsoft licensing is knowing what rules apply when you are utilizing downgrade rights (the right to install an earlier version of the product under a newer license).

The version purchased determines the use rights regardless of what version is installed.

However; this gets a little more confusing for companies who maintain Software Assurance on their products.  For example if a customer bought a license for Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise in July of 2011 with Software Assurance (we’ll assume 3 full years of Software Assurance) they would have bought the rights to Microsoft SQL Server 2008R2 Enterprise (either per server or per processor) and enjoyed upgrade rights to later versions of that product. If they choose to run 2008R2 (or an older edition), then the 2008R2 rules would apply. If they choose to upgrade to 2012 then the 2012 rules would apply.

In July 2014 that customer will need to decide if they are going to renew Software Assurance.  As soon as they renew Software Assurance they are in essence refreshing the license version of all products with Software Assurance to the current edition.  Therefore, they would no longer get to leverage the rules from 2008R2 they would now have to follow the rules for Microsoft SQL Server 2014.

There are both advantages and disadvantages for customers but the important thing for customers to remember is that renewing Software Assurance has a licensing impact which should be considered so that you are not accidentally put in a position of being non-compliant.

Just one more thing to consider in your due diligence when determining what products to renew Software Assurance on at your next renewal.  Let us know if we can help!

Microsoft Windows Server 2012 - Licensing Changes

While much of the focus this year has been on Microsoft's planned release of Windows 8, Microsoft Windows Server also has a planned release this year.  Microsoft Windows Server 2012 is slated for general availability in September and has some significant licensing changes planned to accompany the release.

Even though you may have no plans to move to Windows Server 2012 at release, this will impact all Windows Server purchases made after General Release.

 

Summary of planned changes:

1. All server licensing is changing to the per Processor model (no more “per server” licensing)
2. They are eliminating the “Enterprise” edition (the only difference between the remaining editions of Standard or Datacenter will be how they license virtual OSEs…functionality between editions will be exactly the same).
3. Each license will cover 2 processors on the same device. Existing licenses with Software Assurance will convert as follows:
• Microsoft Windows Server Datacenter – 2 licenses will convert to a single Datacenter license
• Microsoft Windows Server Enterprise – 1 license will convert to two Standard licenses
• Microsoft Windows Server Standard – 1 license will convert to one Standard license
4. Standard will now include the right for 1 physical or 2 virtual OSE’s per 2 processor box

Timing of release has not yet been disclosed (I’m betting September) – I recommend you analyze your environment and determine if you want to execute a purchase prior to general release so as to minimize the impact by maximizing the conversion ratios.

 

As always, if you need help or simply want to discuss this further let me know – I know Microsoft licensing (particularly when it changes) can be confusing…I’m happy to help explain it.

 

Please note, these changes are “planned” – by the time General Release occurs there could be more changes as the licensing terms are not set until release.

Microsoft Enterprise Agreements - Microsoft SQL Server Strategies

In case you haven't heard it yet, Microsoft SQL Server 2012 is going to contain some major licensing changes. Customers with existing (or new prior to the release of SQL Server 2012) Enterprise Agreements (EA) or Enrollment for Application Platforms (EAP) with SQL Server included on those agreements have some great opportunities right now but should be working out a strategy to meet their current and projected needs.

If you're unaware of the changes, check out our blog on Network World to find out more details.

If you have SQL Server Enterprise on your EA or EAP before the release of the 2012 version you can continue to purchase the same licensing model until the end of your agreement. In other words, even though the SQL Server Enterprise server and Client Access License (CAL) model will disappear with the release of 2012, if you already have that model on your EA or EAP you can continue buying under that model until your agreement ends. Additionally, if you have SQL Server Enterprise processor licenses on your EA or EAP, you can continue to purchase processor licenses (rather than core licenses) through the end of your agreement.

This presents a number of opportunities for organizations to save money moving forward but having a strategy will be key! If you don't already have these products on your EA or EAP, you might want to consider if you should add them prior to the release of Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (as opposed to waiting until your next true-up which might mean you miss an opportunity). 

As always, let us know if we can help you create a Microsoft licensing strategy that is most beneficial to your organization!

Walking Away From a Microsoft Licensing Agreement

When finances are tight it's not uncommon for companies to start expiring their maintenance contracts, including software maintenance. As with any maintenance agreement that is allowed to expire, it's important that an organization understand the full implications of their actions so that it is a strategic event rather than a reactionary one. 

This is a big topic so will cover several postings - check back for more updates or e-mail us with specific questions. 

Microsoft has three primary ways for an organization to acquire licensing rights - subscription licensing (Microsoft Desktop Optimization Pack aka MDOP is an example), perpetual licensing (their traditional model where once you buy it you own the rights forever), or perpetual with maintenance (Microsoft Software Assurance aka SA). 

Subscription licensing expires at the end of the subscription agreement (unless there is a buy-out option). I'm not going into details on this type for this article. 

Perpetual licensing does not expire but also does not have upgrade rights. So again will not be discussed in this article. 

Perpetual licensing with Software Assurance includes upgrade rights until the SA expires. When SA expires, your organization is entitled to the latest version of the product which has been released to volume licensing customers. Those licenses then become perpetual licenses but inherit the licensing terms from the agreement under which they were acquired. 

For example, a customer who had a full platform Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (which automatically includes SA) which they allowed to expire at the end of May 2010 would walk away with perpetual licenses for the following Microsoft products: Office Professional Plus 2010, Windows Server 2008 Client Access License (CAL), Exchange Server 2010 Standard CAL, SharePoint Server 2010 Standard CAL, System Center Configuration Manager 2007 R2 Client Management License and Windows 7 Enterprise (but be aware of any subscription components, those are not perpetual). However; those perpetual licenses will always be restricted to the licensing rights under the Enterprise Agreement (for example, no secondary use rights for Microsoft Office which means if a user has a desktop and a laptop each would require its own license). 

While a license is covered under SA, it is at it's most flexible. Consider your future plans prior to allowing SA to expire. A couple of things to think about: 1) Will you be using any of the enhanced functionality of the Microsoft Enterprise CAL Suite? 2) Will you be increasing your server virtualization efforts and will Microsoft Windows Enterprise Server or Microsoft Windows Datacenter edition provide you with a more cost effective solution? 3) Are you licensed under Device CALs when User CALs might be more effective or vice versa - these can only be changed at time of renewal and guess what...you're not renewing. 

However; now is still the time to push the envelope on this (before expiration) as there are ways of getting this changed as long as you still have active SA. The first two scenario's would be covered by "Step-up" licenses from lower versions carrying SA. This allows you to leverage the monies you've already spent on the lesser edition by paying a reduced price for the higher edition but can only be completed while you have active SA on the product. 

Watch for more to come...or if you're considering walking away from a Microsoft Licensing Agreement talk to us first, it can help you avoid future costs and headaches!

Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Licensing Changes - CALs Also!

(Updated 5/18/10 based on info from Microsoft)

I heard an ugly rumor yesterday about Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 from Gaby Amar at Softmart saying that in order to use SQL Server 2008 R2 in a server/CAL model you will have to have 2008 R2 CALs as well (typically for R2 releases you don't need an updated CAL). Well...checked it out with Microsoft licensing and he was absolutely correct (I should have known better than to be surprised, LOL)!

Basically, Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 is a major release (think in terms of a release such as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 to Microsoft SQL Server 2005) so don't let the lack of year change in the naming convention fool you.

Customers who have active Microsoft Software Assurance on their exisiting SQL Server products will have the new release rights, but those that don't will need to purchase new licenses in order to run the software (for those who run in Server/CAL mode this means both new server licenses and new CAL licenses).

CAL Requirements

1. If you have Microsoft Software Assurance currently in effect on your SQL Server CALs, then you are entitled to SQL Server 2008 R2 CALs
2. If you do not have Software Assurance, you must have SQL Server 2008 R2 CALs to run SQL Server 2008 R2 using the Server/CAL software licensing model (in other words...don't try to run with your older SQL Server 2008 CALs).

You may be wondering why I'm making such a big deal about this...after all it is a new release, of course new licenses are required. My point is this: it is a departure from how Microsoft has licensed Windows Server 2008 and Windows Server 2008 R2 where the Windows Server 2008 CAL can still be used on the newer version Windows Server 2008 R2.

Additionally, there are changes to the processor licensing for SQL Server 2008 R2. You might want to check out some of these resources for more information on this and other SQL Server 2008 R2 changes.

Microsoft has provided the following links for further information on licensing:

• The SQL licensing quick reference guide: http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/licensing.aspx
• Direct link to the guide: http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/7/0/270B6380-8B38-4268-8AD0-F480A139AB19/SQL2008R2_LicensingQuickReference-updated.pdf
• Overall SQL Server 2008 Licensing FAQ: http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/licensing-faq.aspx
• Microsoft SQL Site: http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/
• Product Use Rights has info on the following products: R2 CALs (OCS, System Center Configuration Manager, System Center Operations Manager, System Center Virtual Machine Manager) http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/about-licensing/product-licensing.aspx

For more information on virtualization and SQL Server 2008 R2 check out Andrew Fryer's blog.

If you have any questions - let me know! This is a huge change in Microsoft's licensing trend.

Software Licensing - Gaming the System

It seems in a number of my recent conversations with a major software publisher (who has one of the most complex licensing structures going)...that they keep referencing companies that "Game the System" and what a wrong thing that is to do.

Question - when they make the rules, can you really ever "Game the System"? Don't get me wrong, we specialize in helping customers get creative with how to reduce their licensing costs for their software...but if it's allowed within their convoluted licensing terms, how can you be doing anything wrong?

Take the IRS for example (since it's April 15th), their rules are complex (far more complex than any software publisher) but they expect you to take advantage of every credit that you are entitled to through their rules. They don't call foul and say you're "Gaming the System" when you take advantage of rules that work in your favor. Why should a software publisher?

LOL - yes, I did just compare this software publisher to the IRS...LOL!

Frankly, the ones who write the rules hold the cards - if you can work within those rules and minimize your costs, who are they to complain? If they don't like it, they can change their rules.

What do you think...is it possible to "Game the System" in a negative way?

Resellers and Publishers in the world of Software License Management

I woke up this morning to a great Twitter from a good friend and great coach Jak Plihal (http://www.beingsolutions.com/). It was the quote:

"It is hard to get a man to understand something, if his living depends on him not understanding it." by Upton Sinclair.

To me, this perfectly explains the relationship between resellers (VARs, LARs, and any other acronym that is responsible for selling you software), software publishers and the details of software licensing.

There are details in software licensing agreements and product use rights that can be turned to a benefit for a company in legally reducing their software licensing costs...but you're not going to find them all out by asking your reseller or publisher for help.

Why? Not because they are necessarily trying to mislead you or keep you in ignorance - instead it's because they honestly don't even think of those options...because their living (or magnitude of it) depends on them not thinking of those options.

Now, there are definitely some that are better than others (I love working with Softmart for example as their reps have demonstrated to me a strong ability to keep the customer's needs in focus) but as long as their income relies upon what you buy then Upton Sinclair's quote will continue to apply.

When it comes to negotiating the best deal for licensing - the bulk of the savings opportunities comes from making full use of the product use rights and volume licensing agreements terms - not from the discount you negotiate (or not from the discount you negotiate without knowing these items intimately). Get your advice and education from an independent expert...know in advance who profits from your purchase and what their motivation is so you can better analyze their advice.

Remember, "It is hard to get a man to understand something, if his living depends on him not understanding it." Upton Sinclair.

Thanks Jak!

Software Licensing - 2010

Wow, can't say I'm upset to see the end of 2009! Having been in business since 1999 I've seen some ups and downs (think California, technology, early 2000's...ouch!) and am happy that with business maturity comes a certain tolerance to economy and business shifts...but I'm ready for this year to be over!

What's in store for licensing in 2010? I think we will continue to see a lot of acquisitions occur this year - which means eventual changes to volume licensing agreements. Be sure to keep an eye on mergers, acquisitions and divestitures to see which of your software licenses are impacted. It typically takes at least a year for any changes to volume licensing agreements but it might have a big impact on your maintenance decisions.

For Microsoft users there will be several new releases this year in Office, SharePoint and SQL Server to name a few. SQL Server is also being purported to have a couple of new editions and changes to some of the licensing terms (in particular SQL Enterprise and SQL Datacenter edition). Be sure to keep a close eye on these, especially if you have a virtualized model.

SaaS will continue to feel it's way and don't be surprised to hear more about the Microsoft Enterprise Subscription agreement...an agreement that has long existed but (in my opinion...as is all of this blog) wasn't priced well for most businesses.

Also, for those renewing Microsoft agreements there are some changes to your terms and conditions that you might not be aware of...the loss of the 30 day "grace" period on renewing of Software Assurance and an increase to 90 days for notice of change of reseller (hint, this determines who gets paid for your purchases and impacts any incentives resellers will offer to you - be sure to handle this on a timely basis if changing. You don't want the reseller you're "firing" to get paid for the renewal you do next month.)

What do you expect to see happen with software in 2010? Any licensing trends you know are happening or changes to PURs?

Ways to Cut Costs - Software Licensing

It's funny - when times are lush, companies feel they don't have the time to put in a SAM program...when times are tight, companies feel they don't have the money to put in a SAM program.

Unfortunately, it's a Catch 22...if you had a SAM program, your staff would have more time because they would be more efficient and you'd have more money because you wouldn't be wasting it on higher maintenance fees and over priced products.

Sorry, I'm on my soapbox and I know it. Just remember, it doesn't take as much time or as much money as you think it does and the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Two recent items have come up that impact the costs of software licensing:

1) Microsoft Financing - they've just changed the rules.
2) Webinar Series "Cutting Costs - Software Negotiation"

Microsoft Financing (for those of you who didn't know it, Microsoft will finance your deals that involve purchases of Microsoft software as well as hardware and other services) has changed the rules a bit. It used to be that you didn't have to buy much software to finance your whole deal...apparently they are now going to require that at least 35% of the deal be for Microsoft software. Read the details for Scott Bekker's blog.

Webinar Series on cutting costs through software negotiations. For 10 years we've been helping our clients cut their costs (after they've already internally negotiated the deals). We're now offering a webinar to help teach you some of our techniques. This series isn't about contract law, it's about understanding the insides of the deal and turning it into cash and benefits for your company.

So, I know many of you are trying not to spend money right now on software...don't forget - those annual maintenance agreements you're paying is still spending money and many of them can still be renegotiated to lower your costs!

Software Licensing - What You Don't Know Can Cost You!

I was having a conversation with a gentleman on Friday night at a business mixer and discovered that he was an IT infrastructure consultant advising a fairly large size enterprise on a new structure to support their very distributed user-base.

During the conversation he mentioned his surprise at the amount of money it was going to cost his client to implement Microsoft Office 2007 for their 7500 users. We talked a little more as I wanted to understand what program the company was considering purchasing through - and I found out that they had formerly had Software Assurance but it had expired almost 2 years ago. What this consultant didn't know (and neither did his client and no one else was bothering to point it out) is that Office 2007 was released to the general public on 1/27/2007 and (don't quote me on this date) was available to their volume licensing customers around October 2006. Software Assurance entitles you to the latest version of the software released as of your expiration date - whether you've installed it or not. That is in perpetuity (for traditional licensing).

The result being, that was $2m the client was going to spend for software they were already licensed for! I told the consultant to go back to the client and have them review their licensing statement of the Microsoft Volume Licensing web site to make sure dates were good but that it looked like that was money they could keep in the bank (and to hire us in to review the rest of their licensing plans to avoid any other costly mistakes).

This is an area where we frequently find clients uninformed or misinformed. Talk to an unbiased licensing professional before making a software investment - what you don't know can cost you a lot of money!

Do It Yourself or Have a Professional Do It For You?

Sorry I've been rather quiet the past couple of months...we've been launching a new service (or more accurately - finally marketing an old service) and that's been distracting me a bit.

What we're doing is finally offering our SAM managed services offering (LOL...OK, when we started doing this 10 years ago we were calling it Outsourcing) to all of our clients.

Basically, we do everything to give you the information you need to run your business with the appropriate software licensing at the appropriate cost. See, for us - that's easy. We live and breathe software licensing, processes, controls and negotiations. We keep up with what's going on in the marketplace, because it's our business. Typically companies (excluding large enterprises) simply can't dedicate the resources to do this in a cost efficient manner. For us to do it, the service pays for itself and you're not running the risk that you're relying on a staff member whose knowledge is from 2 versions ago.

We're not looking to replace your current staff members...we're looking to free up their time so they can focus on areas that move you forward.

Our service has been extremely successful - we've been told by our clients that the price is attractive, the deliverables timely and needed, and the independent relationship (not the reseller, etc) extremely beneficial and ties in well with internal governance programs.

However; I'm curious, what are your thoughts?...What would you want in such a service? How often would you want it? What would you want to pay for it? Would you want a service like this?

Here We Go Again...

Let's take a walk down memory lane....the year is 1994 and a mid-size national firm (1,200 PC's) has a new software manager who realizes that the firm needs to be buying their software on a volume license, so she starts down the path of finding out everything she needs to know to make this happen.

Since there's no one she can find who can educate her on this, she turns to her reseller...who invests a lot of time and energy into educating her. Finally, time comes to seal the deal and another reseller walks in the door and tells her a few more things that the first reseller didn't tell her....things that would have a strong impact on the financial viability of the purchase.

Time passes, this software manager continues to learn and comes to realize that there were even more things she should have been told that neither reseller told her...that money was lost on the deal because she hadn't known them when the deal was made. Unfortunately, there hadn't been anyone to advise her that didn't have a vested interest in the deal.

Fast forward to 2008, that software manager (and yes...that was me) would no longer have to rely on the advice of a reseller...there are instead a number of small Software Asset Management (SAM) consulting firms that would appropriately advise her on all important aspects of the deal - helping her make the right choice and the best deal for her business.

However; we have to be careful that this valuable source of independent information remains available to consumers.

Most major resellers are now starting up SAM consulting businesses in response to publisher requirements. Here's the problem with that...since consulting isn't the primary business line a reseller can price their consulting services at a price that an independent firm can't compete with...and the next thing you know, the only source of information for you on that major purchase is someone who has a vested interest in the outcome...

Are we coming full circle? I hope not - the reason I started my firm in 1999 was because I saw a need for companies to have someone on their side of the deal....whether it's me or another small SAM firm, I don't want companies to lose that independent perspective.

What are your thoughts?