Unannounced Lansweeper price quadrupling

[ThKl]

So apparently since today you have to license a minimum of 2000 Assets, quadrupling the price for everyone below 500 Assets.

We happily payed 500€ for 180 Assets. But paying for 2000? There is no way.
Will there be an option to stay on the 500 Assets tier for ongoing customers?

[FrankSc]

Jonathan Conn wrote:
I asked our vendor to check into this minimum license increase and this is the response our rep received from Lansweeper:

“The end user may be remembering when Lansweeper was offering Legacy license pricing.
Lansweeper moved to $1 per asset price structure a couple years ago in preparation for the launch of our new Cloud platform.
They may have been on a legacy price plan. Lansweeper had been transitioning the legacy accounts to the $1 per asset pricing with gradual increases from 2019, 2020 and 2021.
The new Lansweeper plan provides access to their new Cloud platform and all the enhanced features that they have added to Lansweeper software.
[My company] concern has been the same for the majority of Lansweeper customers.
At the 1.00 msrp per asset, they are still the lowest option in the marketplace. The minimum order quantity is 500 assets, they scale in increments of 500 up to 3000 ,then scale in increments
Of 1000 assets.”

We began using Lansweeper after the change to $1.00 per asset, and have never used the legacy licensing pricing (something Lansweeper should be able to look up and see for themselves). I'm verifying with our vendor rep, but according to this response, Lansweeper will still sell at a minimum of 500 assets. Going back to my earlier post, I don't know why I had to verify this through my vendor contacting their sales team when it would be very easy for Lansweeper to publicly state that existing customers are grandfathered in at the 500 asset minimum. Unless whoever responded to my rep was incorrect. Would someone from Lansweeper please confirm the response that I received above?

I'm also confused about the cloud platform because as mentioned, we've always had the newer $1.00 per asset license structure and have never been on the legacy licensing model. To my knowledge, I've never been told how to access the cloud platform or (if it's not been released yet) received any information about an upcoming cloud platform. I know Lansweeper recently purchased Cloudockit, but the press release makes this sound like something that will assist in scanning cloud based assets. Besides that press release, I see nothing on Lansweeper's website about a cloud platform. I had to do a Google search to find this website talking about Lansweeper's cloud platform and how to use it. For Lansweeper to point out that their license model provides access to their cloud platform as a benefit, they don't seem to be promoting or making it easy to access the cloud platform.

For the Cloud Platform, we have been only introducing this very recently. More information can be found in our spring release announcement:

• https://www.lansweeper.com/2022-spring-release/

[CyberCitizen]

Your main marketing model was great for a small to medium business, your price increases are ridiculous now.

I was one that would normally go to bat for Lansweeper. You have a great product, not without some issues and your rollout/fix plans are interesting, to say the least.

When you have a wish list of features/bugs that are still not implemented after years.

We have around 445 assets. We already limit stuff we do not need to report on, so we are only capturing the needed assets and it's mostly used for software deployment as we already have an asset system we use for tracking financials, depreciation etc. Lansweeper lacks the full asset management system features, but what it did lack it made up for in the computer information features and software deployments.

I have spent the last 4 years configuring custom reports, getting useful information, automated deployments, promoting Lansweeper etc. But as of our renewal period, if the asset limit is still set at 2000 assets, we will not be renewing again. Forcing a small to medium business to license at a minimum of 2000 assets is ridiculous.

That has taken our renewal cost from $695.00 AUD to $2,970.68.

How do you think I can justify an increase of $2275.68 to management with no major changes to the product or how we use it.

Time to look at SCCM (we were already licensed but preferred Lansweeper) BatchPatch, PDQ etc for software deployments. This move will shoot Lansweeper in the foot.

[Todd]

We have just under 500 assets as well. Are you telling me the price is going to increase by 4x? I know they were going to start counting monitors but I was just going to exclude those and assumed nothing would change. I hate to stop using this, but I can't afford price to increase that much either.

[rader]

If this price increase affects our renewal, then I will have just spent the past three years customizing Lansweeper for naught. We're on the 500 plan model and I can't justify a quadruple increase just to keep this running.

Lansweeper Cxx's, why are you trying to lose customers? We're completely happy with the product. Please don't make us leave.

[wbeavis]

No one mentioned the new monitor functionality (that will likely become a requirement). Most of my users have 2-3 monitors. Easily changing monitors from no charge to charged assets will double our cost.

Is lansweeper trying to lose customers?

[FrankSc]

wbeavis wrote:
No one mentioned the new monitor functionality (that will likely become a requirement). Most of my users have 2-3 monitors. Easily changing monitors from no charge to charged assets will double our cost.

Is lansweeper trying to lose customers?

Hi, at the moment we don't have any plans to count scanned monitors towards your asset license. We introduced this feature, but it is optional.

[wbeavis]

FrankSc wrote:

wbeavis wrote:
No one mentioned the new monitor functionality (that will likely become a requirement). Most of my users have 2-3 monitors. Easily changing monitors from no charge to charged assets will double our cost.

Is lansweeper trying to lose customers?

Hi, at the moment we don't have any plans to count scanned monitors towards your asset license. We introduced this feature, but it is optional.

That's shady as hell. This is on your own web site

If extended display data was detected for a monitor asset, that monitor asset counts toward your Lansweeper installation's licensed asset limit. If no extended display data could be found or if the extended display scanning feature is not enabled, the monitor asset does not count toward your licensed asset limit.

So you are misleading people to turn on the feature, then down the road hit them with the additional cost.

[CyberCitizen]

wbeavis wrote:
So you are misleading people to turn on the feature, then down the road hit them with the additional cost.

Well they want people to use the new features to justify the price increase.

We first checked out all the features, then removed everything we don't need to reduce the asset count as the asset count is what drives the price but now its 2K there is no point disabling anything apart from maybe less details to maintain.

[cswroe]

Stunned by this as it just penalizes mid-sized businesses and smaller organizations (generally non-profits) and does nothing to those large corporations that meet the minimum number already. If you are going to do a price increase, apply it equally, but to specifically target a single segment of your customers is pretty low.

[jconn1980]

We are already overpaying for licenses because we've purchased for 1000 assets, but we're only using 550 currently. This minimum increase would double our cost which isn't as severe as the original poster, but is enough that we'll be looking at other options when our current license is expiring.

If LanSweeper is going to continue allowing lower minimums for existing customers, I don't know why I should have to reach out to the sales team for this information. We purchased our licenses through a vendor, and I've contacted them about how this will affect our decision to renew in the future.