Unified Support is priced as a percentage of your Microsoft spend, so the bill grows with every purchase whether support consumption grows or not. We break the calculation apart, measure what you actually use, and negotiate with a credible exit on the table.
This engagement is bought by IT and finance leaders watching Unified Support climb automatically with every license and cloud purchase: Azure growth inflates it, Copilot inflates it, and the renewal arrives each year with a bigger number and no better explanation of what it bought.
It fits organizations that open a handful of cases a year against a seven figure support fee, teams that suspect the calculation basis includes spend it should not, and anyone renewing Unified without ever having priced the alternatives. The exit does not have to be taken to be valuable; it has to be credible.
Unified Support's economics are structural, and each structure is a challenge point:
Meanwhile a mature third party support market offers comparable coverage 30 to 50 percent below Unified pricing. Whether or not you move, that market is your leverage.
The engagement follows the four workstreams of our Unified Support review statement of work. The fee calculation is deconstructed and verified, actual consumption is measured against entitlement, the alternatives are evaluated and priced, and the renewal is negotiated with the findings as leverage.
| Deliverable | What it contains |
|---|---|
| Cost driver report | The full calculation breakdown, verified spend basis, identified errors and challenge points, and the projected fee trajectory if unaddressed. |
| Consumption and value report | Paid versus consumed support quantified, the effective cost per case, and the elements your operation genuinely depends on. |
| Alternatives assessment | A scored comparison of viable options with cost models, risk analysis, and a recommended direction. |
| Negotiation strategy paper | The target outcome, walk away lines, and the leverage plan built from calculation challenges and credible alternatives. |
| Proposal assessments and transition outline | Written assessments of Microsoft proposals through the renewal, and a transition planning outline where an alternative is chosen. |
Unified Support renewals go unchallenged because nobody inside the organization owns the analysis: procurement sees a percentage, IT sees a safety blanket, finance sees a rounding error on the Microsoft total. Put the three views together, cases against cost against calculation, and the number stops looking inevitable.
The effective cost per support case is the statistic that changes meetings. Organizations consuming a handful of critical cases a year against a seven figure fee are paying five and six figures per incident, and Microsoft's own consumption data proves it.
The alternatives market matured while nobody was looking: third party providers now cover the standard estate 30 to 50 percent below Unified pricing, and hybrid structures keep Microsoft escalation paths where they genuinely matter. We take no commission from any of them, so the comparison is priced, not pitched.
One fixed, all inclusive fee covers all four workstreams, up to four advisory calls, and email support through the renewal, with the cost driver report inside 10 business days. The engagement pays for itself if it does nothing but stop the fee from compounding with your next Azure commit.
Microsoft cost outcomes on the record.
A Fortune 500 company cut its Microsoft EA renewal 20 percent with every cost line challenged on evidence.
✓ Published case studyA Brazilian bank saved 25 percent on its Microsoft EA and improved its audit protections in the same negotiation.
✓ Published case studyA UK financial services firm secured 35 percent savings and contract flexibility at its EA renewal.
✓ Published case studyA leading German automotive manufacturer reset its EA economics with usage evidence at the table.
As a percentage of your Microsoft spend across defined categories, with tier percentages and minimums. That structure means the fee grows with every license and cloud purchase automatically, whether or not your support consumption grows with it.
Yes. The spend basis frequently includes miscounted, double counted, or arguably out of scope categories, and the percentage tiers presented as fixed are negotiable in practice. Verifying the calculation is the first workstream of the engagement.
A fraction of what they pay for. Case volumes, proactive services, and included credits measured against the fee routinely produce an effective cost per case in five or six figures, and that number is the strongest challenge point in the renewal.
For most estates, yes. Mature providers cover the standard Microsoft stack 30 to 50 percent below Unified pricing, and hybrid models retain Microsoft for defined workloads where its escalation path genuinely matters. The evaluation scores them against your actual consumption profile.
No. A credible, priced alternative is leverage even if you stay: repriced tiers, corrected calculation bases, and caps on growth driven increases are all outcomes achieved without moving. The exit has to be real, not taken.
Left unchallenged, it compounds: every new purchase feeds the percentage. The cost driver report projects that trajectory and the negotiation targets caps and basis corrections before your growth becomes Microsoft's support revenue.
The Unified agreement and pricing, your Microsoft agreements for basis verification, and support consumption history: case volumes, severities, and usage of proactive services and credits over a representative period.
Fixed price, all inclusive: all four workstreams, up to four advisory calls, and email support through the renewal. The cost driver report typically lands within 10 business days of complete data.
The calculation verified, consumption measured, alternatives priced, and the renewal negotiated with a credible exit on the table.
One letter a month. Negotiation moves, audit signals, and price book shifts.