Home › How we compare
Alternatives
Anyone weighing a Microsoft 365 migration or a licensing move has four realistic options: a local reseller, a global integrator, a migration tool with your own people, or a partner like us. Here is the comparison without adjectives — including the two rows where we lose.
| Local reseller | Global integrator | Tool, done yourself | IT Partner | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Where they can invoice you | One country, sometimes a region | Almost anywhere, through a global entity or a local subsidiary | Wherever your own reseller already invoices | 131 countries across five regions, each in the currency Microsoft sets; the US via our headquarters |
| Who does the engineering | Often subcontracted, or a small local team | A delivery team assembled per project, frequently offshore | You do | The same practice for every location; migrations and consolidations run by the European team, Azure and development by our US engineers |
| Typical project size | Under 100 users | 1,000 users and up; smaller work is not economic for them | Whatever your administrator can carry alongside the day job | 25 to 3,000 users; our largest was 3,000 users and 24 TB with no planned downtime |
| Pricing model | Hourly or day rate | Statement of work with change orders | Tool licence only | Fixed price after a no-charge scoping; support billed hourly with no retainer |
| Prices published | Rarely | Never | Vendor list price | Yes: starting prices per service, hourly rate, and Microsoft list prices in six currencies |
| When something goes wrong | Depends on the individual | Escalation through account management | You fix it, or you call someone | A named person who takes the first call; postmortems published, including ours |
| Certifications and insurance | Varies; often none | ISO 27001, SOC 2, extensive insurance | Not applicable | None held; stated openly on the verification page |
| Fit for a group with entities in several countries | Poor: one reseller per country | Good, at a price set for enterprises | Poor: each entity needs its own arrangement | This is the case the company was built for |
| Fit for a single company in one country | Good, if they are competent | Poor: too small for them | Good, if the estate is simple | Good; a large share of our German and UK work is exactly this |
| Sentinel, Copilot deployment, SOC services | Sometimes | Yes | No | No; we have delivered no projects in them and say so |
The three other columns describe categories, not named companies. Individual firms vary, and a good local reseller beats a poor partner of any kind. The right-hand column is verifiable: every claim in it links from the facts page.
Reading the table honestly
Two rows go against us, and a reader who does not see that will not trust the rest.
If your procurement requires ISO 27001 or SOC 2 from the supplier, we do not qualify and a large integrator does. We say so on the verification page rather than hoping nobody asks. For regulated buyers this can be decisive, and it should be.
A good reseller in your own city can be in your office tomorrow. We are remote. For a single-country company that values a visit, that matters, and nothing on this site changes it.
For a clean estate under a hundred users, a migration tool and your own administrator costs a fraction of any engagement, ours included. We will tell you which tool and not argue.
Entities in more than one country, tenants that have to be merged rather than moved, and buyers who want the licensing and the engineering from the same people. That is a narrower market than any of the other three columns serve, and it is the one we built the company for.
Not sure which column you are in?
Tenant count, rough headcount, which countries. If a tool is enough, or a local firm is the better fit, you hear that in the first reply.