Our organization is currently in the late stages of evaluating Zero Trust Network Access solutions, with Absolute Secure Access as a finalist. We are a 300-user company in the professional services sector, and my team is tasked with presenting a final cost-benefit analysis. While the technical evaluation has been largely positive, particularly regarding its integration with our existing endpoint management stack, the pricing model has introduced significant complexity into our forecasting.
Our sales representative has presented a quote based on a per-user, per-year subscription. However, the structure appears to have several layers that are not immediately transparent. I am seeking feedback from other mid-market implementations on the following points:
* **True Effective Cost Per User:** The base license fee is clear, but we are seeing mandatory add-ons for "Advanced Threat Intelligence" and "Compliance Reporting Modules" that were presented as essential for a production deployment. This has increased the per-user cost by approximately 22% over the base figure initially discussed. Is this bundling typical, and were you successful in negotiating a more consolidated SKU?
* **Support Tier Scrutiny:** Absolute offers three support tiers: Standard, Premium, and Elite. The sales team strongly recommended the Premium tier for any business-critical deployment, citing faster response times for security incidents. The cost jump from Standard to Premium is substantial. For those with 200-500 user deployments, what has been your real-world experience with the Standard support SLAs? Are the Premium guarantees necessary for stability, or can Standard suffice with a well-trained internal team?
* **Scalability and Future Costs:** The quote is for a three-year term. We are concerned about cost predictability upon renewal. Specifically:
* What has been the average annual price increase upon renewal for existing customers?
* Are there hidden costs associated with scaling? For example, if we increase to 350 users mid-term, is the proration straightforward, or are there penalties or minimum incremental blocks?
* How are major version upgrades handled? Is there a risk of a forced re-negotiation or additional fees for access to new core features?
* **Competitive Leverage:** To aid our negotiation, it would be invaluable to understand how Absolute's final all-in cost compares, in your experience, to other players like Zscaler Private Access, Palo Alto Prisma Access, or even Tailscale for a similar user count. Which aspects of Absolute's pricing were more or less competitive?
Our primary decision criteria hinge on total cost of ownership over a five-year horizon, vendor stability, and the operational burden on our lean security team. Any detailed insights into your procurement process, unexpected costs post-implementation, or the long-term value realization of the platform would be immensely helpful for our final business case.
PM by day, reviewer by night.
That 22% bump from "mandatory" add-ons sounds like a classic bait-and-switch on the sticker price. I've been playing with Absolute's sandbox for a different evaluation (smaller team, around 50 users) and noticed their sales pitch heavily bundles those threat intelligence and compliance modules as "core" for any production deployment. But I've also seen other mid-market folks on Reddit mention they managed to peel off the compliance reporting module by demonstrating they already had a SIEM feeding that data. Might be worth asking your rep to unbundle and justify each line item as optional - especially if you already have threat intel from your endpoint stack.
One thing I'd add: the effective cost per user can also shift if you've got any seasonal contractors or part-time folks. The per-user, per-year model assumes full-time headcount, but if 30 of your 300 are short-term consultants, they'll push the average cost up. Absolute's licensing doesn't seem to offer a prorated or concurrent user tier. Did your rep mention any flexibility around user definitions?
If it's not measurable, it's not marketing.