Microsoft backtracks on Partner Network changes that sparked uproar
This is so strange to observe from the outside. The statements of Gavriella Schuster, when that whole debacle started, provided some insight into the partner program:<p>&quot;We can&#x27;t afford to run every single partner&#x27;s organisation for free anymore, because it&#x27;s not free&quot;<p>&quot;Put it this way, when customers are paying for services they turn them off very quickly. When we give it away for free the partners leave these services on. While my budget has to pay internally for this.&quot;<p>&quot;We have given partners a year to figure this out. I just can&#x27;t make it free anymore.&quot;<p>&quot;If we hadn&#x27;t had such an influx of new partners and everyone&#x27;s usage hadn&#x27;t been this high, then we may not have been in this situation&quot;<p>The article, where these quotes are from, talks of 7000 new partners each month [1]. So, on one hand, Microsoft clearly has a communication problem. The proposed changes slipped in without a clear, official statement and wasn&#x27;t the backlash obvious? Why didn&#x27;t anyone stop Schuster from doing this? On the other hand, how can they continue like this? They lose huge amounts of money because partners get a ton of licenses for free. So what&#x27;s their plan? Unfortunately the announcement is as shallow as possible. Hard to regain trust this way.<p>But many development shops, as the one I&#x27;m in, are so dependent on Microsoft and the partner program, that switching is nearly impossible...<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dailytimes.live&#x2F;business&#x2F;microsoft-cuts-partner-benefit-surprise-move-88246844" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dailytimes.live&#x2F;business&#x2F;microsoft-cuts-partner-...</a>