Every provider says its advice is independent. Almost none will tell you what it gets paid, by whom, for recommending what. Here is ours.
You hold the accounts. You hold the billing. On every one of these except Microsoft licensing, we never sit between you and the vendor, and we receive nothing whether you pick it or not.
| Vendor | Commission or referral fee | Reseller agreement | How you buy it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropic (Claude) | None | None | Direct, your own account |
| OpenAI (ChatGPT) | None | None | Direct, your own account |
| xAI (Grok) | None | None | Direct, your own account |
| Google (Gemini) | None | None | Direct, your own account |
| Open-source models | None | None | You host, or your own cloud |
| Microsoft Copilot | None if you bring your own licence | Yes, see below | Direct, or through us |
For the record: we use AI tools, including Anthropic’s Claude, for our own internal work, and we earn nothing from recommending them. Our Practice Automation products use rules and Microsoft-native tools first, and any automation that handles client PII or sensitive data runs on Australian-hosted solutions only.
You can buy Microsoft licences through us if you want to. If you do, we earn a margin of a few per cent. Three things about that, plainly.
Our price is Microsoft's Australian recommended price. Buying through us does not cost you more, and buying direct does not cost you less.
It moves with Microsoft's promotions and programme changes, so a fixed percentage here would be wrong within a quarter. Ask what it is on the day and we will tell you in writing.
And we will say so. It changes nothing about the engagement, the install, or the support.
Where we do supply licences, they appear as their own line on your invoice, separate from our service fee.
Microsoft occasionally pays partner incentives and rebates on licence volume, and we have received them. They are small, irregular, and have never been a meaningful part of our revenue. We will tell you the actual amount for any period if you ask.
Too small and unpredictable to plan around. An incentive that arrives occasionally, at a rate Microsoft sets and changes without consulting us, is not something a business can build a recommendation on.
They only apply if you buy through us. We tell clients they can buy direct, and we mean it.
Our prices are published. Practice Automation is priced per product and Managed IT per user. The licences underneath do not change our fee.
Look at what we actually say. “The licence you already hold does this” is one of our most common answers. It earns us nothing.
Just as important as commission, and asked about far less often. A provider with a partner tier to protect is not independent, even if no commission changes hands on the day.
Nothing obliges us to lead with any vendor, and no vendor sees our pipeline.
We have no revenue target with an AI vendor that a recommendation could jeopardise.
Work is delivered inside your Microsoft 365 and Azure tenant. There is no Evisent product a build has to run on.
Reports, policies, flows and documentation are delivered in editable formats and are yours to keep, including if you take them to someone else.
“The Microsoft 365 licence you already hold does this.”
“This process is deterministic. Automate it, do not put AI on it.”
“Nothing here is worth building yet. Come back when the volume doubles.”
We make our money on the engagement: the audit, the install, the support. Not on the licence. That costs us revenue when the right answer is “use what you have”, and we think that is the correct way round, because the alternative is advice you cannot check.
LAST REVIEWED: AUGUST 2026 · REVIEWED BY: HAYDEN BURT, DIRECTOR
Either way, you get a straight answer in writing.