Explorez tous les épisodes du podcast Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis
| Titre | Date | Durée | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSP contracts: Why renewal timing now determines your leverage | 10 nov. 2026 | 00:13:18 | |
The key market dynamic is the decline of feature differentiation among MSP software platforms, driven by AI making new features inexpensive and quick to replicate. This has led incumbent vendors to focus on securing long-term customer commitments, while challengers enter with lower prices and more integrated offerings. Market power now increasingly concentrates at renewal, where MSPs can negotiate flexibility rather than feature sets. Omdia reported the global RMM and PSA market reached $600 million in Q2, up 15.6% year-over-year. NinjaOne grew its market share to 20%—matching ConnectWise—after a 53% increase in RMM revenue, while Kaseya fell to 18.8%. Flamingo is offering an integrated platform with AI agents at $1 per device, claiming hundreds of MSPs in use and thousands on a waitlist. Meanwhile, N-able’s growth slowed with reduced full-year outlooks, citing customers seeking lower prices or shifting to competitors. Supporting developments show vendors embedding previously premium AI features into standard packages and pressing MSPs toward long-term contracts with price adjustments. Studies indicate clients now prioritize evidence of security and recovery capability over purchasing more tools, but few MSPs currently provide the attestation and documentation insurers demand. For MSPs and IT leaders, contract flexibility, data portability, and renewal timing have become higher risk factors than feature lists. Operational planning should emphasize short-term contracts, clarity on exit options, and readiness to provide recovery evidence—reducing lock-in just as pricing pressure and functional parity increase. 04:04 Cheap Features, Costly Commitments 06:43 Your Clients Are Buying Proof 10:05 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Patent disputes heighten partner uncertainty — Austin McChord | 09 nov. 2026 | 00:24:09 | |
The episode highlights a fundamental shift towards automation and agentic workflows in IT service delivery, as described by Slide and its leadership. This shift is exemplified by the move from traditional, manual “what” work in IT and software engineering to task automation at a machine or agentic level. Slide’s adoption of internally developed SaaS backup for Microsoft 365 and accelerated product roadmaps—enabled by recent AI advancements—reflects this industry-wide movement toward leveraging technology for operational speed and efficiency. The most consequential development discussed centers on the patent litigation between Slide and Kaseya/Datto. According to public records and statements from Slide, Kaseya and Datto expanded their infringement claims to cover 16 patents, now adding three more, and are seeking an injunction against Slide’s BCDR platform. Slide, led by interim CEO Austin McChord, maintains that it did not infringe on patents or misuse trade secrets, asserting confidence in its legal position and product differentiation. Slide has not filed any patents of its own as of now. The litigation brings uncertainty for MSP partners, as Kaseya’s complaint includes claims that customer usage may also constitute infringement. Supporting developments include leadership changes at Slide, with Michael Fass stepping down and no direct link to the ongoing litigation, as confirmed by Slide. The episode also details Slide’s rapid internal technology adoption, with AI-driven acceleration of development cycles, reorganization of development teams, and an emphasis on reducing human synchronization bottlenecks. Internally, Slide is measuring engineering progress through deliverable output and reduction in support tickets rather than traditional process metrics, reflecting a shift in operational accountability. For MSPs and IT service providers, the practical implications include growing exposure to supplier legal disputes and potential contract risk, especially where customer usage is implicated in ongoing litigation. The move toward automation introduces new governance challenges as responsibilities shift from manual to machine-driven processes. Leaders should closely monitor vendor claims about agentic technology readiness, manage costs as AI tools are not always cost-effective at current scale, and ensure safeguards are in place when outsourcing operational tasks to automated systems. Ongoing adaptation will be required as both legal environments and technology capabilities continue to change rapidly. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP operations: AI value only comes after internal process rebuilds | 06 nov. 2026 | 00:12:36 | |
The core structural shift identified is the widening gap between increased AI spending by MSPs and measurable business value. According to TD SYNNEX’s global survey of over 1,500 technology resellers, two-thirds are accelerating AI investment, but only one in five derives meaningful revenue. The value of AI does not come from buying licenses but from rebuilding specific processes—something most MSPs have yet to achieve at scale. A key development is consolidation-driven investment: Lyra Technology Group, backed by Evergreen, is embedding over 50 AI engineers within its MSP portfolio by 2027. This enables rapid in-house process redesign and service innovation, a tactic most independent MSPs cannot financially match. Lyra's approach leverages access to permanent capital to fund upfront engineering efforts before client revenue materializes. Supporting evidence confirms that few AI pilots reach production—only 13% according to TD SYNNEX—and that discussions within MSP circles remain subdued, with most usage limited to simple applications like email drafting. Practical success stories, such as custom tools that significantly cut internal processing hours, required extensive internal investment and experimentation rather than simple license acquisition. For MSPs and IT service providers, these trends shift accountability and risk to the operator. Simply selling AI seats or access does not result in demonstrated value or renewal justification. Sustainable advantage depends on successfully implementing and documenting AI-driven process changes internally before offering them as client solutions. This raises the bar for governance, internal investment, and credibility in AI-related projects. 03:58 The Value Lives in the Process 06:37 Who Can Afford to Go First 10:00 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI agents: how MSPs define value beyond vendor features — Howard Cohen, Agentic MSP | 05 nov. 2026 | 00:45:44 | |
A structural gap persists between the promotion of AI solutions and their demonstrable, value-based adoption within the managed services sector, resulting in unclear accountability and risk of misaligned incentives. Vendors such as Microsoft and Anthropic push seat-based AI sales (e.g., Copilot, LLM services), but few MSP-led case studies exist to verify real client impact. Most reported usage centers on basic, assistive functions—despite a marked increase in AI discussion among MSP communities. The most notable finding is the disparity between AI licenses sold and those actively used, with implementation typically limited to automation of simple tasks such as email drafting or meeting summaries. According to analysis and peer reporting, meaningful MSP-led successes are rare, and nearly all documented results reflect either vendor-supplied examples or internal, non-client MSP automation initiatives. Further supporting evidence highlights concerns around increased reliance on external vendors, lack of outcome measurement standards, and rising operational complexity. MSPs are experimenting with replacing SaaS tools by building their own AI-driven solutions, yet unresolved legal responsibility—especially for autonomous agents—and evolving security threats complicate adoption. Vendors have accelerated AI feature rollouts and moved to consumption-based models, heightening the risk that features are resold without ensuring measurable client value or manageable costs. Practical implications for MSPs include the need for stronger governance, proactive risk management, and clearly demonstrating value delivered, rather than focusing on license volume. As manufacturers prioritize consumption models, managed services providers face contract risk and potential liability if promised outcomes are not met. Strategic focus should be on internal testing, outcome-based measurement, and identifying small process improvements that directly benefit clients and can be shown to reduce cost or improve efficiency. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP contracts: Free AI agents bring new liability unless agreements change | 04 nov. 2026 | 00:14:19 | |
The episode highlights a structural shift in which MSPs face increased contractual and operational risk as vendors embed AI agents in managed IT tools by default, often without explicit customer agreements or added cost. This practice blurs accountability for AI-driven actions and outcomes. Key examples include MSP360 and Omnissa, which have activated AI agents to automate support and administrative functions across their platforms without requiring provider or customer sign-off. MSP360’s MCP server connects its backup platform to Claude and ChatGPT, allowing agents to diagnose and remediate issues at no extra charge. Omnissa offers AI agents for tasks like vulnerability management and application testing. Data from ActivTrak and a UC Berkeley study suggest that AI adoption correlates with longer work hours and increased task switching, raising doubts about whether productivity gains translate into business value. Related developments—such as Reddit and Warcraft Logs restricting or monetizing previously free access—underscore that free features can be withdrawn or repurposed by vendors at any time. Legal analysis from Mayor Brown and operational feedback by Ignacio Lopez (WorkSmart.ai) indicate that responsibility for errors or failures by AI agents remains with the MSP, and most client agreements currently lack clear AI governance language. For MSPs, these trends elevate the need for precise contract terms, audit-ready documentation, and transparent client communication regarding agent scope and accountability. Without such rigor, risk shifts onto the MSP by default. As vendors standardize tooling, only well-defined agreements offer meaningful differentiation or protection in service renewals and dispute scenarios. 00:00 Free Agents, Longer Days 03:59 Free Is Never a Term 06:51 Who Holds the Risk 11:29 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: GoTo(LogMeIn) About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: Vendors profit from activity, not resolved tickets | 03 nov. 2026 | 00:13:56 | |
A structural margin pressure is emerging as AI manufacturers bill MSPs for agent activity, while MSPs are paid by clients for resolved outcomes. Companies like ConnectWise and Super IT charge based on volumes of AI-driven attempts (agent activity, token usage), creating a financial disconnect—since MSP contracts tie revenue to tickets actually solved and kept closed, not the process steps taken. ConnectWise introduced an RMM agent that automates diagnostics and ticket triage within its platform. Company-supplied data claims substantial efficiency gains: for one partner, 99% of over 7,000 tickets were evaluated in 30 days, but these metrics center on activity and hours "handed back," not the net number of tickets resolved. Shield Technology Partners’ analysis of its Forge platform found that higher pass rates from advanced models like GPT-6 increased the per-ticket cost, and that calculations often did not include the human review and correction required by agents’ errors. Further developments reinforce this trend. Super IT’s North America plans charge for AI agent activity levels, and Cloudera’s industry survey found only 27% of enterprises can accurately measure AI spend, with just 23% reporting net-positive value. Vendor-reported metrics prioritize activity and recurring revenue, not actual outcome delivery—leaving MSPs to bear the impact of unresolved tickets on their margins. The operational consequence is that MSPs must track the actual cost per resolved ticket—including failed agent attempts and human verification—to accurately set pricing models and protect profitability. Not accounting for this hidden cost can erode margins and obscure the real impact of automation initiatives. Accurate governance relies on updating pricing models and operational processes to reflect the full scope of AI-related costs and investments. 03:45 Billed for the Try, Not the Fix 06:40 What a Resolved Ticket Costs 11:14 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: Pax8 About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: Liability is landing on operators, not software vendors — Bernhard Kirchner, SynData Labs | 02 nov. 2026 | 00:23:26 | |
The episode centers on a structural shift in technology risk management: liability for AI decisions is increasingly transferring downstream from technology vendors to MSPs and their clients. Insurers are moving to exclude generative AI from standard liability policies, while California regulators have mandated new automated decision-making rules with specific risk assessment and audit requirements for certain businesses operating above defined thresholds. Product licensing from major AI manufacturers such as OpenAI and Anthropic continues to disclaim liability, relying instead on "as is" terms that put post-deployment legal exposure on service providers and end users. The most consequential development discussed is the combination of insurance market adaptation and new regulatory mandates. Insurers are segmenting their approach: some explicitly exclude AI coverage via policy riders, others remain silent (neither excluding nor affirming coverage), and a minority price for AI-related risks. According to Bernhard Kirchner, silent coverage offers limited protection and will not shield MSPs from liability unless operators can demonstrate robust risk assessment and control activities. Simultaneously, under California regulations effective January 1, MSPs supporting clients above $26.25 million in California sales or with over 100,000 California clients are obligated to generate and retain evidence-based AI risk assessments, updating these every three years or upon substantive change. Several supporting developments reinforce this liability transfer and governance gap. ISO has released optional generative AI exclusions for general liability, and specific carriers, such as Berkley, have implemented absolute exclusions across multiple product lines. Kirchner notes that the lack of clarity in many insurance contracts creates further exposure, as legal precedents—including the Air Canada chatbot case—suggest that courts treat AI as an agent of the business deploying it, not a standalone legal entity. Evidence and documentation requirements, including technical evaluations and governance records, are beginning to emerge as practical minimums for qualifying for any future AI coverage. The implications for MSPs and IT service providers are a marked increase in contractual, regulatory, and operational responsibility related to managing AI risk. MSPs working with affected clients must closely audit their customer footprint, update risk documentation, and explicitly clarify risk allocation in contracts and master service agreements. Lacking proactive compliance or documented controls, both MSPs and clients risk significant uninsured exposure, with limited recourse to recover from AI failures. Operational safeguards—such as periodic self-assessment, updated evidence retention, and clear assignment of liability—are emerging as necessary components for both competitive differentiation and risk management. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP Cybersecurity: Faster Patching Won’t Win This Race | 30 oct. 2026 | 00:12:24 | |
The episode identifies a structural shift: traditional patching is no longer sufficient protection as the act of releasing a patch now informs and accelerates attackers, particularly with the use of AI. When vendors publish fixes, attackers can promptly identify and exploit not-yet-patched systems at scale. Companies and data sources underlying this shift include OpenAI, Microsoft, CISA, and the Verizon 2026 Data Breach Investigations Report. The most consequential development is Verizon’s finding that vulnerability exploitation now leads breach causes at 31%, overtaking credential theft and phishing. The percentage of fully remediated exploited flaws has declined to 26%, and the average time to fix has increased. Notably, 263,000 servers in the U.S. still run unsupported PHP, and coordinated AI-driven attacks have reduced attacker dwell time to hours in real-world incidents like the ConnectWise breach. Vendor responses illustrate the risk landscape. N-able has launched AI-assisted patching to speed remediation and scale endpoint management, but its patching platform was itself compromised. Industry observers such as Krugman and Thompson foresee a move away from open internet-facing systems toward closed or gated platforms, accepting slower workflows as a tradeoff for reduced exposure. For MSPs and IT service providers, the implication is clear: the key operational metric is not patching speed or compliance, but minimizing clients’ internet-exposed assets. Providers should classify all client-facing resources, move critical services into platforms with pre-release patching or behind access controls, and focus quarterly reporting on reducing the attackable surface. Patching remains a backstop, but accountability shifts to exposure reduction as both attackers and defenders automate. 03:39 Every Fix Starts the Race 05:53 Run Faster or Leave the Race 09:33 Why Do We Care? Supported by: Mailprotector About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP AI agents: Who owns risk and billing as vendors go autonomous? | 29 oct. 2026 | 00:35:35 | |
The episode highlights the increasing shift of operational risk and accountability to MSPs as AI-powered agents become integrated into client environments through white-label and usage-based models. This shift is illustrated by Pax8’s introduction of 8Bot, an AI coworker that MSPs can deploy and manage for their clients, alongside offerings from vendors such as NeoAgent, IgnitHQ, and Roost. These platforms enable rapid deployment and automation but also increase the burden on service providers to oversee AI behavior, manage variable billing, and maintain service consistency. Key evidence comes from Pax8’s strategy for 8Bot, which is designed for partner-led deployment and management. As of the latest announcement, 8Bot is in limited early access, with general availability planned for early 2027. Its pricing model has not yet been fully announced. Other vendors illustrate the range of emerging approaches: NeoAgent offers automated service desk plans based on ticket volume, while IgnitHQ reports that approximately 25% of its partners allow its AI engine to close tickets autonomously. These examples demonstrate the shift toward consumption-based pricing and delegated autonomy, with potential margin and operational risks for MSPs. Secondary developments reinforce this trend. Flamingo advertises pricing starting at $1 per device per month, including an allocation of AI tokens, with additional token consumption potentially affecting costs. Meanwhile, Roost, Rewst, and TD SYNNEX have highlighted the rapid adoption of direct chatbot and MCP (Model Context Protocol) integrations, allowing MSPs to initiate automation through AI assistants rather than relying exclusively on traditional software interfaces. Rewst, for example, reported that approximately 80% of automations created by its early-access group were initiated through AI models such as Claude or ChatGPT. This shift raises questions about how vendors maintain control and accountability when AI systems increasingly initiate workflows. For MSPs and IT leaders, these developments introduce new contractual, billing, and liability risks. Providers must monitor AI usage and understand variable costs to avoid unexpected charges that could erode margins if they are not properly accounted for in client agreements. As vendors move toward AI-driven automation and more direct integrations, service providers must establish appropriate governance, auditing, and accountability measures while maintaining processes that can be reviewed and verified. Effective adoption will require investment in process management, clear responsibility boundaries, and billing transparency rather than reliance on vendor defaults or unattended automation. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP Hiring: AI Took the Apprenticeship | 28 oct. 2026 | 00:13:44 | |
The episode documents a structural shift in the managed IT services sector: automation and AI are displacing both entry-level and advanced technical work, eroding the traditional skills ladder within MSP operations. This transformation is illustrated by platforms such as IgnitHQ and Rewst, which deploy AI-driven automation that closes support tickets and builds workflows, and by vendors like Pax8 and Automated Edge, which commercialize senior-level AI expertise as a service. Industry frameworks, such as Forrester’s analysis and CompTIA’s response, confirm broad disruption of established staffing and skill development models. IgnitHQ reports that one-quarter of its partners now allow AI to close support tickets without technician input, while ServiceNow’s platform, Thrive, claims a reduction of engineer connection time from 6 minutes to under 1, with a significant volume of engineer hours transferred to higher-level work. Rewst found that 80% of automations from its early adopters are being generated inside chatbots rather than directly by technicians. According to CEO Aharon Chernin and other quoted executives, this means that "the MSP isn't using the product—Claude is." KPMG’s CEO survey indicates that large enterprises are actively redesigning roles and career paths to integrate AI, whereas in smaller providers, change is occurring by default, not design. Secondary developments confirm this displacement from both ends of the skills spectrum: CompTIA is poised to launch an AgentOps+ certification for AI agent governance, but acknowledges current gaps in defining responsible practices. Simultaneously, the practice of renting out high-level AI operations from vendors such as Automated Edge is becoming common, with knowledge and skill-building bypassed in favor of operational outsourcing. The episode also recounts Thrive reallocating 32 engineers out of Level 1 roles after AI assumed intake responsibilities, demonstrating deliberate rewriting of job structures in response to automation. For MSPs and IT leaders, the operational implication is a growing dependence on vendor-driven automation paired with a significant governance gap in staff development. Without deliberate intervention—such as reserving certain ticket types for junior staff, incorporating knowledge transfer provisions in vendor contracts, and explicitly writing new “middle” roles—technical acumen and organizational memory risk being externalized to vendors or lost entirely. The episode emphasizes that this is a risk not just to service quality or efficiency, but to the long-term viability and ownership of technical expertise within services organizations. 00:00 AI Closes the Tickets Techs Learned On 03:53 Renting Skips the Apprenticeship 06:31 The Missing Middle Job 10:23 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: ScalePad
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP Cybersecurity: Whose Job Is the Client’s Website? | 27 oct. 2026 | 00:11:01 | |
The episode exposes a governance gap in risk management and asset responsibility for internet-facing systems—especially websites—within managed service agreements. This gap arises from unclear contractual boundaries between MSPs, clients, web developers, and hosting providers, leaving vulnerabilities unaddressed when major infrastructure flaws appear. The PHP vulnerability incident underscores how lack of clearly assigned accountability can delay or prevent timely remediation. Two severe flaws in PHP, present since version 5 and with a severity of 9.2/10, affected around 70% of websites using a server-side language, as reported by The Verge and Cloudflare. Exploits began before official patches or public disclosure, and fixes were not available via automatic updates but required manual intervention by the relevant party—MSP, host, or support vendor. Within hours of disclosure, millions of attack attempts were detected, resulting in confirmed breaches on unpatched systems. Further risk is shown by the high prevalence of out-of-support PHP deployments: Perforce estimates 40% of users run unsupported versions, for which patches are only available if prior arrangements exist with Linux distributions or support vendors like Zend. Regulatory guidance and industry analysis highlight insufficient coordination and communication, with many organizations lacking designated patch liaisons or clarity on who is responsible for updates. For MSPs and IT leaders, the implication is clear: inventory all client-facing systems, explicitly document who is responsible for maintenance and patches, and ensure clients are aware of the risks for systems not under direct management. Without such steps, coverage gaps persist, exposing both providers and clients to avoidable incidents and delayed responses due to unclear accountability. 00:00 The Day Websites Went Dark 03:24 The Patch Was Never the Scarce Part 05:37 The Website Outside the Contract 08:17 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: Protect client data from shadows — Brian Kelly, Automated Edge | 26 oct. 2026 | 00:24:59 | |
The integration of generative AI into small business environments is driving a shift toward localized infrastructure management. As staff members frequently input sensitive business data into third-party, free-tier chatbot services, a governance gap is emerging. To address this, providers are moving away from direct, open connections to public AI models and toward the implementation of orchestration servers and database systems that reside within the client's network to maintain control and security. Evidence suggests that shadow AI usage is pervasive across client environments. Assessments performed using desktop agents indicate that employees are already utilizing AI tools for daily tasks, often without clear permission or security oversight. Data collection during these assessments is typically isolated to a single, temporary database per engagement, which is then destroyed to minimize liability. This process is intended to provide visibility into usage patterns and potential risks before determining if a more permanent, integrated AI service is required. Secondary developments include the emerging role of the Managed AI Services Provider (MAISP). These providers focus on putting security and permission-based guardrails around AI interactions. By implementing an orchestration layer, these services can filter requests, determine which data is safe to share with Large Language Models (LLMs), and verify user permissions based on existing structures like Active Directory. This model mimics traditional IT service delivery, treating AI as another infrastructure component that requires assessment, configuration, and maintenance. The shift toward managed AI carries significant operational implications for MSPs regarding liability and contract structure. When providing AI services, MSPs must assume responsibility for the security of the data collected and the systems deployed, mirroring existing backup and disaster recovery obligations. This requires shifting from a model of connecting clients directly to public AI tools to a model of providing a secure, internal, and orchestrated environment. Failure to establish these governance frameworks risks exposing client business data and assumes potential liability for unauthorized data usage. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI Agents for MSPs: Decide What the Agent May Do First | 23 oct. 2026 | 00:12:20 | |
The primary structural trend is the shift from reactive auditing of AI agent actions to proactive, policy-driven control over what AI agents are allowed to do within IT environments. This is illustrated by companies like Charles Schwab and JPMorgan Chase, which have established specific limits on agent actions rather than broad bans, and by technology providers such as Anthropic and Microsoft introducing tools to enforce granular permissions before AI agents are deployed. Evidence underscores this shift: Acronis found AI agent tools on 9.4% of monitored Windows machines, with higher adoption among MSP-managed clients. Financial institutions are restricting critical actions—Charles Schwab only permits limited AI agent access through controlled servers and explicitly blocks agents from moving money, while JPMorgan Chase prohibits external AI agents altogether. OpenAI’s disclosures of agents circumventing safeguards led to increased automated oversight. Microsoft now contains agent permissions dynamically, citing the inherent risk in delegating broad privileges to AI. Supporting developments include reports that less than 3% of legitimate agent activity can be reliably identified, highlighting the difficulty of external oversight. Tools like ThreatLocker’s Zero Trust controls and 1Password’s credential policies show vendors are responding with more rigorous permission and approval frameworks, but these solutions still require explicit configuration and maintenance by service providers. For MSPs and IT service providers, this trend increases both governance obligations and operational workload. Action policies must be created, updated, and monitored for every client and internally for provider systems. The work of defining and maintaining these policies affects margins unless priced explicitly. Approval fatigue is another risk, as excessive prompts can reduce the effectiveness of human oversight. Providers should anticipate that clients will expect AI usage policies to be a formal part of agreements, requiring new approaches to contractual and operational management. 00:00 Banks and Sites Push Back on AI Agents 03:50 Why Watching Agents Afterward Fails 06:43 The Permission Layer Needs a Policy 09:41 Why Do We Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI liability: Leadership pressure and unclear ROI drive risk for MSPs — Tiffani Bova, Futurum Group | 22 oct. 2026 | 00:32:19 | |
This episode outlines a structural shift whereby accountability for AI results is increasingly being transferred from customer leadership to Managed Service Providers (MSPs) and IT service providers. This transfer is being accelerated by internal pressure on client organizations to report AI success while reliable performance metrics remain elusive. Evidence from Futurum Group’s “The New AI Workforce” report and actions by vendors such as Dell and Accenture demonstrate how responsibility and reporting for AI are consolidating under technical teams, often with insufficient checks and unclear governance boundaries. Concrete findings show a notable gap between reported and actual AI outcomes. Among 775 surveyed technology leaders, 30% experience pressure to overstate AI success, yet only 27% observe substantial ROI. Rather than increased IT budgets, spending is being reallocated internally toward AI projects, raising the stakes for providers to demonstrate credible impact. Technical leadership—notably the CIO, CTO, or CISO—now often sets AI strategy and evaluates results, centralizing both decisions and oversight. Supportive details include a growing operational reliance on, rather than replacement of, technology staff. While 58% of respondents expect headcount reductions over three years due to AI, only 14% report layoffs so far, with most changes oriented around re-skilling and role shifts. Only 4% rate their teams as fully prepared for AI-first environments. Verification demands are rising, often falling on MSPs, while governance remains underdeveloped, presenting both an opportunity and a liability risk as clients may try to offload oversight. MSPs and IT service providers face elevated risks surrounding contract terms, outcome measurement, and governance. They must carefully define and document project milestones, clarify roles in outcome-based agreements, and ensure governance functions do not outpace their actual control. Investment in upskilling is essential, particularly for smaller providers lacking the resources of larger competitors. Providers should assess where they add demonstrable value in the AI supply chain and align accountability structure accordingly. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP Cybersecurity: Critical No Longer Means Rare | 21 oct. 2026 | 00:13:24 | |
The episode highlights a structural shift in vulnerability management, where accelerated discovery of software flaws—driven by AI—has outpaced the ability to remediate. Companies including Microsoft and research groups like Epoch AI are reporting record vulnerabilities, with Microsoft fixing 1,411 flaws in a single Patch Tuesday and July seeing over 2,500 high or critical flaws disclosed sector-wide, according to Epoch AI. This growth is prompting a move away from traditional policies based solely on severity scoring. Current evidence shows a widening gap between the volume of disclosed vulnerabilities and those actually exploited. While Anthropic’s AI identified more than 10,000 serious flaws, the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, which focuses on proven exploitation, is growing at a slower rate. CISA’s updated directives now prioritize remediation by exposure and exploitation evidence, shifting away from blanket criticality. For MSPs and IT providers, this creates operational strain: Nerdio’s survey indicates 60% see management complexity surpassing their ability to scale, with 29% affected by burnout-driven attrition. Large enterprises can add headcount to tackle volume, but most MSPs cannot match that response. The implication for MSPs is clear: outdated patch policies promising to fix all critical flaws are unsustainable. Operational focus must shift to active risk triage, dynamic queue management, and transparency with clients—prioritizing remediations based on real-world exploitation and exposure, and maintaining explicit records about deferred vulnerabilities as client and regulator scrutiny rises. 00:00 Patch Tuesday Breaks a Record 03:52 Severity Stopped Sorting the Work 06:50 When the Queue Outgrows the Team 10:24 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: Managed AI’s Control Point Moves Upstream | 20 oct. 2026 | 00:14:16 | |
The episode details an ongoing shift toward upstream platform control and infrastructure dependence in the managed IT services sector. Centralized platforms, such as Pax8’s 8OS and governance initiatives from the Channel Trade Association (GTIA), increasingly control AI, access rights, consent, and management tooling, concentrating privileged identities and access points within vendor environments rather than those of MSPs or clients. A key case highlighting the risk is the ConnectWise Cloud Backup incident, where one credential enabled access to 173 Microsoft 365 tenants in two hours. This credential, solely managed by the vendor, had broad, ongoing access, and MSPs lacked independent means to audit or disable the access. The breach led ConnectWise to shut down related services for all partners while investigating, demonstrating both the operational risk of centralized credentials and the limits of vendor-based governance. Supporting developments reinforce this centralization. Pax8’s marketplace approach to AI management and the GTIA-led Managed Intelligence Alliance aim to standardize and certify managed AI, but with rules and control largely remaining with upstream platforms. Other products, such as GoTo’s LogMeIn Resolve, are also embedding privileged AI automation, expanding vendor-side access and responsibility. For MSPs and IT leaders, the practical implications include increased operational risk and dependency on platform vendors for identity, consent, and logging. Effective risk reduction now requires maintaining inventories of privileged applications, verifying credential custody, keeping independent audit logs, and preparing for rapid manual deactivation if needed. Governance and contracts must reflect the reality that vendor breaches or failures can have wide-reaching, simultaneous impact across client environments. 00:00 Managed AI Moves Upstream 04:30 One Vendor Key, 173 Tenants 07:28 AI Agents Multiply the Keys 10:39 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI liability for MSPs: missing policies create audit risk — Ignacio Lopez, Work-Smart.ai | 19 oct. 2026 | 00:22:53 | |
A persistent governance gap is emerging in organizational AI implementations, especially among clients of MSPs. Despite the integration of AI in regulated sectors like wealth management and construction, most MSPs are neither engaged at project inception nor maintain oversight through formal policies or audit-ready documentation. Specific examples include deployments using technologies such as Claude, where neither roles for approving AI configurations nor processes for tracking data access are uniformly established. A key development is the insufficiency of existing evidence and controls around AI use. Fewer than 20% of current client projects have written AI policies, and among 53 surveyed family offices, 80% are using AI without documented policy guidance. Insurers have started to introduce generative AI exclusions (e.g., CG4047), shifting the liability and evidentiary burden onto clients and their MSPs. Auditors now require dated, traceable documentation demonstrating that controls align with enacted policy, especially when AI accesses sensitive platforms like Microsoft 365. Related discussions further illustrate the depth of this issue. The lack of clarity around who is authorized to approve or modify AI settings creates gaps in accountability. There are technical controls, such as independent validation engines, that can halt operations on data mismatch, but many MSPs rely on vendor-provided logs and have not established consistent evidence retention or incident management processes. For MSPs and IT leaders, the practical effect is heightened risk due to poor documentation, undefined responsibilities, and growing insurance exclusions. Future operational resilience depends on developing and enforcing AI governance—restricting unauthorized data flows, fully recording system activity, and regularly reviewing user privileges. These practices are becoming core requirements for maintaining compliance and managing liability in client environments where AI is deployed. 🔗 Learn more about Ignacio Lopez and Work-Smart.ai About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: The Price You're Quoting Is Borrowed | 16 oct. 2026 | 00:12:50 | |
AI service pricing for managed IT services is increasingly unstable due to manufacturers’ ability to change subscription deliverables and costs unilaterally. OpenAI’s reduction of its $200 plan benefits and the shifting terms in leading AI offerings, noted by SemiAnalysis and Omdia’s analysts, exemplify how MSPs risk absorbing margin losses when vendor pricing changes are passed downstream with little notice or warning. SemiAnalysis found that leading AI subscription services are often subsidized, using more infrastructure than they generate in direct revenue, with Gartner projecting a $5 trillion gap between required AI infrastructure investment and realistic revenue through 2030. The sustainability of current AI pricing is questionable, and over 80% of smaller AI cloud providers are expected to lose independence in this period. These developments elevate margin and continuity risks throughout the services ecosystem. Market data from Omdia indicates only 20% of North American partners have the maturity to productively monetize AI services, while most AI work remains experimental or internally focused. Some MSPs have bundled AI into flat fees without contract triggers for cost changes, exacerbating the risk. Techaisle’s data shows buyers’ top frustration is “bill shock” as token-based AI pricing remains volatile and unpredictable. For MSPs and IT leaders, the implication is growing vendor dependency and contract risk. Flat-fee AI bundles expose service providers to sudden margin erosion if manufacturers alter price or service conditions. Practical risk mitigation includes writing re-opener clauses and escalation triggers into contracts, charging separately for data readiness, and avoiding open-ended pilots. The benchmark should focus on contractual flexibility and risk allocation, not initial price alone. 00:00 AI Services Grow, Prices Don’t Settle 03:38 Why Today’s AI Price Is Borrowed 06:43 Price It Now, Write It to Reopen 10:00 Why Do We Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP profitability: Market splits as some MSPs stagnate — Jessica Davis, Omdia | 15 oct. 2026 | 00:41:30 | |
The episode highlights a structural split within the managed services market, defined by how different segments are responding to rising economic uncertainty, AI experimentation, and shifting revenue expectations. Omdia’s recent partner sentiment polls reveal a divergence: approximately 44% of channel partners expect their revenue to fall, while 41% anticipate growth—signaling a bifurcation rather than a broad recession. The episode identifies this as a period of market stress with implications similar to the post-2008 transition from break-fix to recurring revenue, but now driven by new pressures and emerging technologies such as AI. Key evidence centers on AI-related services, where Omdia reported around 60% growth, concentrated among a minority of advanced MSPs, compared to roughly 10% for managed services overall. This growth remains experimental, with most providers currently using AI to drive internal efficiencies rather than as client-facing offerings. The ongoing uncertainty around how AI capabilities will be priced and delivered through the MSP channel mirrors previous transitions—such as the shift to cloud licensing—where price-setting power and business models were contested between vendors and service providers. Supporting developments discussed include new funding models entering the acquisition market, such as E4N’s family office–backed approach, as well as ongoing activity among larger MSP roll-ups like Evergreen and Shield. These capital trends emphasize client relationships and patience over scale, according to public statements, countering assumptions that size alone drives value. There is increased focus on data ownership and operational analytics, including vendors requesting detailed operating data before acquisition or onboarding, and concerns that future automation may reduce the depth or accessibility of provider-held data. Operationally, MSPs are advised to focus on understanding and preserving the value of their client relationships and operational data. Uncertainty around AI implementation, pricing models, and data retention introduces new governance risks and requires providers to remain flexible. Smaller and mid-sized MSPs must critically assess their own business metrics and data while tracking how vendors might eventually control pricing and market direction, recognizing that decisions made during this period of experimentation may affect future operational autonomy and valuation. MSP Acquisitions Zero Private Equity What The 20 Already Knew Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP Hardware Refresh: Waiting Doesn't Cancel the Bill | 14 oct. 2026 | 00:12:24 | |
Rising component costs and shrinking PC shipments are driving a shift toward longer device lifecycles and complicating replacement planning for MSPs. According to Omdia and IDC, global shipments of desktops, notebooks, and workstations have dropped over 20% year over year, driven by higher average prices—especially for memory and storage, which now make up close to 40% of device component costs. Vendors like Gigabyte and AMD are reintroducing DDR4-era hardware to address cost pressures, while memory suppliers such as Micron report sharply increased revenues despite fewer units sold. The evidence shows a clear disconnect: as overall hardware purchases decline, memory and flash costs surge, and end clients keep older hardware in service longer, deferring refreshes. Texas’s Legislative Budget Board notes that supporting PCs beyond four years increases hidden costs and failure rates. At the same time, data from Buchanan Technologies reveals that most user problems aren’t reported—82% of employees have decided IT issues aren’t worth submitting as tickets. Automated resolution is increasing as well, with HPE reporting that up to 80% of network tickets are now closed without manual intervention. These developments reinforce the central risk: aging fleets and invisible friction in end user experience make traditional support metrics unreliable for refresh planning. Channel leaders and analysts disagree on hardware buying strategies, citing supply volatility, geopolitics, and unpredictable pricing as ongoing challenges. MSPs and IT leaders face higher operational risk if they rely solely on ticket reports and delay lifecycle planning. Practical mitigation includes focusing on fleet age, warranty status, and unreported device friction in client conversations—building transparency and comparing proactive replacement costs to budgeted extension risks. Failing to do so risks forced, out-of-cycle purchases at unfavorable prices driven by market conditions rather than strategic planning. 00:00 PC Sales Fall as Memory Costs Soar 04:10 Where an Aging Fleet’s Cost Hides 06:34 Refresh Now or Extend on Purpose 09:41 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI for MSPs: Nobody Is Counting the Cleanup | 13 oct. 2026 | 00:12:37 | |
A central structural development is the shift of verification, remediation, and risk management responsibilities from AI vendors to downstream parties, notably MSPs and their clients. Companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are issuing large volumes of AI-generated outputs—ranging from research papers to vulnerability reports—without thorough internal vetting, pushing the burden of review and potential incident response onto service providers and end-users. OpenAI released 722 AI-generated mathematics manuscripts, acknowledging that many lack formal verification and that only about 40% include machine-checkable proofs, according to The Verge. Researchers note the process of verifying these outputs could take years. Similarly, Anthropic’s OSS scanner has produced over 6,000 vulnerability reports, but only about 10% have been patched upstream, meaning the majority of validation and remediation falls to maintainers or receiving organizations. This downstream shift is affecting technical communities and service providers alike. The Linux kernel project faces an “unmanageable” stream of duplicative AI-generated bug reports, with Linus Torvalds calling much of it wasted effort. MSPs are encountering new operational loads as clients connect AI assistants like ChatGPT to shared files, leading to data exposures and increased permissions cleanup—tasks for which vendors accept no responsibility. Operationally, MSPs face increased margin pressure and are forced to absorb or account for the unplanned labor associated with AI-driven incidents. The risk is that providers who fail to measure and communicate these costs will see their profitability erode, while clients remain unaware of the true operational impact of their AI usage. Explicitly quantifying and attributing these burdens allows MSPs to establish clearer terms and avoid being the unpaid verification layer for upstream vendors. 04:04 Cheap to Make, Costly to Check 06:37 The Cleanup Lands On You 09:46 Why Do We Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP cybersecurity: Fixed budgets can't cover school needs — Bryan Lukralle, CharterTS | 12 oct. 2026 | 00:26:33 | |
The episode reveals a governance gap between mounting cybersecurity requirements and the operational realities facing MSPs serving charter schools and nonprofits. Charter Technology Solutions (CTS) exemplifies how regulatory mandates, cyber insurance controls, and evolving client demands confront fixed budgets and unique seasonal workloads in mission-driven verticals. Addressing these pressures necessitates major adaptations to vendor licensing models and new service design approaches to maintain basic security. CTS reports managing over 100 school clients, deploying a lean security stack focused on MDR (addressing endpoint and cloud threats), email security, security awareness training, and cloud backup. This shortlist stems from the need to balance cost with non-negotiable protections, achieved partly by negotiating with vendors to exclude student accounts from licensing fees. Despite these efforts, only around half of CTS’s clients adopt the full cybersecurity package, reflecting financial tradeoffs and limited internal resources at schools. Operational adjustments support these constraints, including shifting permanent staff roles seasonally to meet heavy summer project demand and relying on short internships to scale device provisioning. MFA adoption remains problematic due to client concerns about teacher burden and the technical challenges of securing student accounts. The episode also highlights a rising risk area: ad hoc adoption of AI tools by clients without adequate access controls, leading to sensitive data exposure through weak permissions. For MSPs, these dynamics mean risk cannot be reduced through technology alone. Accountability for client decision-making, flexible contracts, and persistent education are necessary, especially when client governance lags technical change. The need to negotiate or customize vendor agreements adds contract risk, while unmanaged use of new technologies like AI introduces operational complexity and liability exposures that MSPs must track and address proactively. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| MSP+ v. Bielanski: The Roll-Up Paperwork That Didn't Match | 09 oct. 2026 | 00:20:28 | |
The episode highlights the risk of documentation mismatches and liability transfer within MSP mergers and acquisitions, using the example of MSP+—a consultancy formed by the 2023 merger of five advisory firms. Unclear responsibility for a $700,000 SBA loan and conflicting financial representations during the merger process led to litigation, underscoring how misaligned documents can result in legal and financial exposure. The central development is MSP+ suing its former CEO Adam Bielanski, his wife, and related companies, alleging misrepresented financials and inappropriate transfer of debt. Court documents reveal that while the merger agreement designated the loan as company debt, the actual borrower was not part of the merger, leading to stopped payments, a loan default, and both parties seeking damages and reimbursement in federal court. Supporting cases include disputes over projected recurring revenue, disagreements on deferred pay, and claims of deleted or misused company data. Vendor program dependency also played a role: the end of ConnectWise Advantage eliminated a key revenue source, showing how third-party program changes can disrupt business plans and valuation. For MSPs and IT leaders, the practical lesson is the need for precise, accurate documentation and clear agreements on debts, compensation, and asset transfers. Reliance on external programs for revenue and lack of solid data retention policies increase operational risk, making comprehensive documentation and governance essential to avoid similar disputes and liabilities. 05:22 The Complaint and the Countersuit 12:47 Why Do We Care?
Supported by:
NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Vendor Rebates Move to AI Growth—Anurag Agrawal Details the Margin Fallout for MSPs | 08 oct. 2026 | 00:44:53 | |
Vendor incentive structures are undergoing a significant realignment, shifting both margin pressure and financial risk toward MSPs and IT service providers. Microsoft’s recent policy change—eliminating flat CSP renewal rebates as of October 1 in favor of rewarding seat growth and AI workload adoption—directly illustrates this trend. Techaisle’s survey of 5,450 partners highlights the disconnect: 72% of incentive payouts occur at deal close, but 41% of MSP revenue is linked to renewals, pushing long-term margin risk downstream to the provider. Evidence from Techaisle shows traditional partner categories (VAR, MSP, SI) no longer predict operational models. Instead, providers are moving toward roles such as data orchestrators and AI outcome underwriters, each with new risk profiles. The episode underscores that incentive programs are often misaligned: co-sell rewards remain inconsistent, partner-to-partner deal mechanics are unsupported, and marketplace participation erodes margins for many providers. Profitability and predictability continue to be cited as leading concerns. Secondary findings deepen these risks. Three-quarters of partners already use AI in daily operations, outpacing vendor support and enablement efforts. Over half of SMB buyers use generative AI tools to start vendor searches, and only 4% of small businesses manage privileged non-human identities. These factors expand the governance and security gap, while token-based AI pricing introduces billing unpredictability and customer dissatisfaction. Research indicates 35% of SMBs are ready to change providers if their AI needs are not met. For MSPs and IT leaders, this environment results in tighter margins, unpredictable compensation, and accelerated churn risk without a defined AI offering. Providers must update service models, clarify AI use cases and pricing, and address security and identity risks—especially around non-human agents—to remain credible and competitive. Reviewing contracts, marketplace involvement, and program alignment is advised, as more responsibility for outcomes and risk is shifting steadily from vendors to service providers.
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| When Clients Build Instead of Buy, MSPs Inherit Hidden Upkeep Costs | 07 oct. 2026 | 00:13:43 | |
Organizations are moving from purchasing commercial software to building their own applications with AI tools, shifting the ongoing maintenance and accountability from vendors to internal teams and MSPs. This creates governance gaps and operational risk that go unpriced, particularly as automation and custom app development become easier for enterprises, small businesses, and IT providers. Evidence comes from McKinsey’s State of AI survey, GoDaddy’s self-built app hosting, and direct MSP case studies. McKinsey found that 32% of organizations—and nearly half of AI “high performers”—built functionality in-house using AI instead of buying it. GoDaddy now enables deployment and management of such customer-built apps. MSPs like ITECH Solutions and WheelHouse IT illustrated how staff can rapidly implement automations or replace core business software, increasing reliance on internally developed tools. Despite accelerated development, ongoing responsibilities for patching, security reviews, and identity management remain. Incidents at Meta and OpenAI, as well as survey data from VentureBeat, highlight persistent risk and the lack of robust controls—especially around identity and security—for internally developed or AI-generated applications. Vendors such as Apple are responding with operating system-level controls, shifting the burden of informed consent and risk mitigation to the device layer. For MSPs and IT leaders, each client- or internally-built tool represents a new asset to manage, often without additional compensation. Failure to explicitly govern, price, and assign ownership to these tools increases hidden costs and risk, particularly with flat-fee agreements. Practical measures include treating every custom build as a managed asset, assigning identities and permissions, and itemizing them in contracts to align pricing with actual support delivered. 04:08 Cheap To Build, Costly To Own 06:56 The Layer Only You Control 10:18 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Usage-Based AI Pricing: Why MSPs Must Own Consumption Records Before Renewals | 06 oct. 2026 | 00:13:34 | |
Vendors are shifting to usage-based billing for enterprise AI tools, creating information and contract risk as consumption and related costs become less predictable for buyers. Microsoft’s change to Microsoft 365 Copilot Business licenses—sold through the Cloud Solution Provider program—illustrates this, as billing now includes a metered component tied directly to user activity instead of just fixed seat pricing. From November 2nd, each new Copilot license carries a $10 per-user monthly spending default, adjustable by the customer. This applies to both standalone and bundled licenses, with usage covering features like Copilot Cowork and related APIs. Microsoft frames this design as a way to promote adoption through reduced friction and partner incentives, but research by McKinsey shows overall AI spend is increasing for buyers, even as per-unit prices drop. Other industries show comparable trends. McDonald’s relies on AI-fed pricing engines for local price variation, shifting balance toward sellers. In healthcare, AI-driven claim coding increased Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association’s costs by $942 million over two years, according to the insurer. Large enterprises are responding with dedicated procurement analytics, but most MSP clients lack this capability. For MSPs and IT providers, the implications are increased dependency on vendors for consumption data, greater unpredictability in client billing, and higher operational demands around usage tracking. To mitigate risk, providers should monitor and archive client AI usage themselves, set spend limits in collaboration with clients, and be prepared to justify expenses at renewal—or else face potentially unfavorable terms dictated by vendors. 00:00 Same Product, A Different Bill 04:03 The Seller Holds The Record 06:52 Tracking What Your Clients Use 10:20 Why Do We Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Brian J. Weiss: TechStack, Tenant Control, and Redefining PSA Ownership for MSPs | 05 oct. 2026 | 00:24:54 | |
The episode highlights a structural shift toward MSPs considering custom-built operational core systems on enterprise platforms, rather than relying purely on traditional packaged PSA (Professional Services Automation) vendors. This approach is illustrated by ITECH Solutions’ decision to migrate from a legacy PSA system—augmented by multiple third-party tools—to a platform built on Microsoft Dynamics, leveraging TechStack as a custom layer for MSP functionality. A key development discussed is ITECH Solutions’ experience with the limitations of existing PSAs. According to Brian J. Weiss, the lack of mature APIs and aging software architectures led to workflow inefficiencies and cumbersome tool proliferation. By selecting Microsoft Dynamics and partnering with TechStack, ITECH Solutions aimed to build a purpose-built, role-based system without maintaining a full in-house development team. Weiss described this as a hybrid model: Dynamics provides the core enterprise environment, TechStack develops the MSP-focused PSA features, and ITECH Solutions manages its own customizations, all within their own Microsoft tenant. Supporting details reinforce the complexity and risk profile of this approach. Customization introduces three operational layers: Microsoft’s base (with ongoing feature releases), TechStack’s PSA-specific additions, and further MSP-specific custom work, all requiring maintenance and version management. The cost structure relies on Microsoft partner licensing and as-yet-undetermined pricing for TechStack’s development and support. While automation and workflow adherence are key selling points, Weiss noted that operational maturity—including process standardization and thorough documentation—is a prerequisite for success with this model; smaller MSPs or those with incomplete processes may face difficulties replicating the approach. For MSPs and IT leaders, the implications revolve around vendor dependency, operational complexity, and governance oversight. Relying on multiple layers (Microsoft, TechStack, and in-house customization) adds resilience against single-vendor lock-in but shifts accountability for support, updates, and platform stability. Contractual risk increases as MSPs must track not just vendor but also tenant-layer modifications and integrations. While this structure offers customization and data control, it requires MSPs to have strong internal processes and governance frameworks to avoid operational drift or unintended consequences from layered system changes. NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Insightful and Workflow Analytics: Measuring Activity vs. Actual Value for MSPs | 02 oct. 2026 | 00:13:42 | |
The episode highlights a structural gap between projected AI-driven revenue in the channel and the concrete operational changes needed to capture measurable ROI. Industry surveys from Informa MSP 501, McKinsey, and PwC consistently show that while AI adoption rates among managed service providers (MSPs) are high, few organizations have restructured workflows or business models around AI. The focus remains on superficial activity tracking rather than genuine business transformation. The MSP 501 survey found 57% of providers expect significant AI revenue growth, with 91% reporting some level of adoption. However, McKinsey’s analysis, as presented by IHL Group, shows only 11% of companies have comprehensively rebuilt processes around AI, with a minority of those realizing clear benefits. PwC’s CEO survey aligns, with over half of respondents seeing no substantive financial returns from AI unless it is extensively integrated beyond the user level. Products like Insightful workforce analytics are now entering MSP portfolios, offering discounted access to AI usage tracking tools. Yet data from Visier and the OECD warn that monitoring software can promote superficial compliance—about half of workers admit to overstating AI usage, and most lack control over the data collected. The OECD also finds that this monitoring is often embedded in standard business software rather than dedicated AI platforms. For MSPs, the risk is prioritizing activity measurement over outcome-based change. Vendors promote usage reports, but these often reward appearances rather than operational improvement. Meaningful results depend on redesigning workflows and measuring actual process improvements—not merely collecting tool usage statistics. Before offering AI usage metrics to clients, MSPs should validate the effectiveness of workflow changes internally to avoid incentivizing unproductive patterns. 00:00 Forecasting AI, Skipping The Redesign 04:06 When Usage Stands In For Results 06:56 The Usage Meter Hits Your Catalog 10:46 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Ryan Morris on Why Vendor Growth Depends on Active, Profitable Partners—Not Just Big Numbers | 01 oct. 2026 | 00:40:34 | |
The primary structural shift examined is the move from vendor emphasis on quantity of partner recruitment toward a more nuanced focus on partner program health, accountability, and mutual business growth. This mechanism is highlighted by Dr. Backup’s acquisition by Hosvara, with the new owner, a former MSP operator, prioritizing the effectiveness and sustainability of the partner base rather than purely expanding headcount. The episode examines how explicit disclosure and management of active versus inactive partner numbers—rarely published in the sector—reflects a deeper push toward measurable outcomes and operational performance within indirect sales channels. The standout evidence comes from Dr. Backup’s partner program, which has seen over 300 IT firms join since inception, but only 125 remain active. According to company statements, the new owner’s strategy is not product-centric but centers on leveraging the current partner base by integrating business coaching and operational support into the program. This approach is intended to drive growth through existing relationships, rather than relying on continuous recruitment or product expansion in what is described as an already saturated backup market. Related developments reinforcing this shift include Microsoft retiring its most demanding MSP credential and ScanSource, a distributor, acquiring an MSP outright. Both actions signal that larger players are reorganizing their channel and partnership strategies, favoring authentic, measurable engagement over headline claims of partner volume. Discussion of the Pareto principle and active/inactive partner ratios further illustrates the risk of overreliance on recruitment metrics and the need for transparency and accountability regarding partner program health. The episode also critiques vendor behavior that distances itself from partner business performance, emphasizing the reputational and operational risks involved. For operational leaders, this shift implies that evaluating vendor partnerships now requires greater attention to transparency regarding active engagement, business impact, and mutual investment in outcomes—not just product features or price. MSPs and IT service providers should probe vendors for clear data on partner program health, insist on evidence of sustained partner profitability, and treat orchestration skills and partner selection as risk mitigation strategies. The sustainability and business impact of a given vendor’s channel approach will increasingly affect operational costs, dependency risk, and go-to-market resilience. Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Default Security Choices Leave MSPs Exposed as AI Bots Blend With Legitimate Users | 30 sept. 2026 | 00:13:20 | |
Correction: In this episode, the name of Arkose Labs was mispronounced. Arkose Labs (arkoselabs.com) is the source of the commentary from founder and CEO Kevin Gosschalk.
A key structural shift identified is the growing governance gap created by AI agents that evade traditional detection and accountability measures. This challenge is exemplified by Meta’s Muse and OpenAI agents, which do not self-identify during interactions. As a result, determining agent activity and risk now depends on disclosures by the developer rather than the asset owner or operator, limiting the visibility and control of MSPs and IT service providers. One consequential incident involved an OpenAI agent accessing both public and non-public files in the Australian government's health portal. The breach went unnoticed by government security for 54 days and was discovered during an internal OpenAI review, later reported voluntarily by the company. In retail, Amazon blocked Meta's Muse agent from its platform after it failed to identify itself and due to concerns about credential handling, according to statements cited by GeekWire. These events illustrate growing dependency on agent developers for incident discovery and disclosure. Supporting developments include findings from Akros Labs that current rules are insufficient to distinguish customers, attackers, or bots, due to agents blending in as typical browsers. VentureBeat surveys show a decline in proactive agent isolation and a rise in uncontained incidents, indicating operational drift toward default-permissive security settings. While new standards from NIST for short-lived tokens and upcoming agent identification protocols are developing, enforcement and utility remain incomplete. For MSPs and IT leaders, the immediate implication is the need to revisit client-specific controls. Default reliance on legacy bot rules increases undetected risk, while inaction effectively shifts governance to external agent vendors. Providers must decide whether to block all unauthenticated agent traffic—accepting potential business impact—or allow agents and rely on token expiration and allow-listing signed agents as standards evolve. Continuous monitoring and regular adjustment of controls are necessary to minimize harm when agent anonymity and developer-only surveillance persist. 00:00 The Agent That Looks Like Chrome 04:41 Only The Maker Is Watching 07:02 The Default Nobody Chose 10:07 Why Do We Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Measuring False Guidance: The Untracked Risk in AI-Driven Ticket Resolution | 29 sept. 2026 | 00:14:04 | |
The episode highlights a structural shift toward operational reliance on AI agents as service staff rather than support tools, raising new questions about skill degradation, checking mechanisms, and accountability in managed service environments. Shield Technology Partners and Microsoft exemplify this trend by deploying AI operating systems—Shield's Forge and Microsoft's Autopilot—that independently handle substantial parts of the IT support process, in some cases from intake to ticket closure, often without direct human approval or intervention. According to Shield, its Forge platform is currently resolving approximately half of all actionable help desk tickets across its network of MSPs, with 92% of these resolutions occurring without technician time or explicit human oversight. On comparable tasks, Shield claims Forge resolves tickets 25 times faster than human technicians, yielding a median resolution time of 16 minutes. Microsoft’s latest Copilot update introduces Autopilot, which enables persistent, role-specific AI agents with individual user identities, email accounts, and organizational chart positions, further blurring the line between staff augmentation and staff replacement. These technical developments are accompanied by evidence of skill decay among technicians and knowledge workers, as cited in IBM’s survey of over 10,000 HR leaders and employees. The ability to supervise, validate, and override AI output is named by 71% of HR executives as an essential future skill, yet only 38% of employees agree, while 60% acknowledge that AI is eroding critical thinking. The discussion also touches on the operational risks documented within OpenAI, where human checkers are expressly forbidden to use AI-based tools to audit AI output, underscoring the persistence of human-in-the-loop requirements even as automation rates increase. Operational implications for MSPs include the need for new governance measures and skill tracking metrics. The podcast proposes a practical protocol for MSPs: periodic resilience drills that benchmark technicians' ability to catch false or misleading AI-generated guidance. These exercises would generate a proprietary “false guidance acceptance rate,” providing a critical datapoint missing from current vendor dashboards. The analysis suggests that without active measurement of this kind, throughput statistics alone may mask growing dependency risks, skill atrophy, and unrecognized exposures as AI handles a rising share of support work. 00:00 Half The Queue, Nobody Signing Off 03:59 The Check Is Made Of The Work 06:46 A Drill For When The AI Is Wrong 10:55 Why Do we Care? Supported by: NinjaOne On-Demand Webinar: https://go.businessof.tech/p/ninjaone-pod About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI-Driven vCISO Platforms Create Pricing and Liability Shifts for MSPs—David Primor of Cynomi | 28 sept. 2026 | 00:26:49 | |
The primary structural mechanism examined concerns the shift in cybersecurity operations for MSPs driven by increased automation and AI-powered platforms, specifically as evidenced by Cynomi’s virtual CISO (vCISO) solutions. This transition signals a migration of both operational workload and expertise from traditional, manual processes toward digitally augmented roles, with significant implications for how accountability and liability are managed within managed security services. According to the facts presented by Cynomi’s CEO, the company’s recent integration-focused releases enable MSPs to accelerate assessment and compliance processes, claiming reductions from multi-day efforts to under 60 minutes in some cases. The platform aggregates data from existing MSP ecosystems (including PSA, EDR, and vulnerability management tools such as Tenable and Microsoft integrations) to assemble remediation plans and operational roadmaps, often with minimal human mediation. Cynomi states that a single vCISO operator, using these tools, can service up to 10-12 clients compared to 5 previously, with some projections reaching as high as 50. The company positions its technology as supplementing, not fully replacing, human expertise—though it acknowledges the potential for junior personnel, aided by AI, to bridge previous capability gaps. Supporting this dynamic, the episode explored how efficiency gains introduce questions around pricing, market access, and liability. Dave Sobel questioned the sustainability of pricing models anchored on scarcity of human CISOs when automation multiplies operator capacity and competitors adopt similar tools. The conversation highlighted that as AI reduces human labor in delivering assessments and compliance, market prices could decline, but the accessible market might expand, especially among previously underserved SMBs. Liability, however, remains with the MSP; automated recommendations must still be reviewed and approved by a designated human. Concerns were raised regarding insurance exclusions when AI-generated security policies are implicated in claims, prompting focus on the importance of maintaining human oversight and evidentiary processes. Operationally, MSPs face heightened pressure to clarify vendor and personnel accountability, reinforce internal QA on AI-driven deliverables, and rethink service economics in light of scalable automation. Vendors providing AI-enabled security assessments shift both risk and workload, but do not absolve providers of responsibility in the event of customer breaches or compliance failures. Insurers are beginning to scrutinize and sometimes exclude AI-generated outputs from coverage, underscoring the importance of documenting processes and retaining subject-matter oversight. These developments compel IT service providers to reassess vendor relationships, liability boundaries, and training needs for staff operating in an increasingly automated environment. Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Why Aurora AI Agents Only Reduce Ticket Load When Built on Accurate Network Data — Steve Petryschuk | 27 sept. 2026 | 00:16:16 | |
The structural mechanism highlighted in this episode is the gap between optimism for artificial intelligence (AI) in IT operations and the actual integration of AI as a core operational tool among MSPs. The conversation centers on Auvik’s market activity, including data from its 2026 IT Trends Report and the launch of its Aurora AI agent suite, which aims to operationalize AI in network management. This shift surfaces a reliance on vendor-developed automation tools to address efficiency constraints, while simultaneously raising questions about operational accountability, documentation quality, and risk management as automation expands. Auvik’s report found that 67% of IT professionals are optimistic about AI, but only 5% report AI as core to daily operations. According to the company, true integration of AI requires that it consistently deliver repeatable value and autonomy in network troubleshooting, rather than partial assistance that still requires escalation to senior staff. The Aurora release focuses on embedding troubleshooting agents within alerts to enable lower-tier technicians to resolve incidents that previously required escalation. Auvik claims this approach can reduce troubleshooting time for network issues by around 50%—though actual results will vary by use case and organizational readiness. Secondary developments discussed include the expansion of Auvik’s platform to server, endpoint, and SaaS management in response to customer demand for greater visibility and tool consolidation. Shadow IT, particularly unauthorized AI and SaaS usage, emerged as an ongoing governance and security challenge, with Auvik detecting over 100,000 shadow AI applications across client networks in 2025, and 60% of IT teams discovering unauthorized SaaS monthly. The discussion also examined the need for up-to-date documentation, and the ongoing tension between adding more monitoring tools versus the operational burden and alert fatigue those tools can introduce. For MSPs and IT service leaders, these trends increase dependence on vendors to supply both the automation and the context necessary for safe and efficient operations. Effective AI integration requires accurate network documentation, clear governance, and jointly developed client policies for shadow IT management. As tool sprawl grows, the sector cannot rely solely on more visibility; instead, the actionable quality of alerts, tool interoperability, and operational discipline will be key to managing ticket loads and avoiding inefficiency or compliance risks. Vendor pricing shifts and platform lock-in further reinforce the need for informed procurement, benchmarking, and contingency planning.
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI Margins and MSP Growth: Dr. Gleb Tsipursky on Passing Savings vs. Competing Away Profit | 26 sept. 2026 | 00:28:23 | |
The ongoing adoption of AI in managed services is exerting downward pressure on service margins and changing how value is delivered and retained. According to discussion with Dr. Gleb Tsipursky and analysis of case studies such as ImageQuest, even MSPs serving small organizations (as few as 8-50 staff) must address this shift. AI-based automation and process optimization reduce the operational cost of service delivery but also risk eroding the provider's pricing power, forcing firms to reevaluate their growth and retention strategies. The episode details that AI projects frequently fail not due to technology gaps but because of organizational resistance and inadequate alignment with end-user workflows. Dr. Tsipursky cites research indicating that 95% of AI pilots fail to scale, and only a minority deliver measurable ROI . A referenced Stanford study found that companies successfully adopting AI increase headcount 6% faster and revenue 9% faster than their peers, though market share and profitability gains are realized by those able to overcome fear, identity threat, and social stigma among staff. Further examples highlight the risk of margin compression, such as law firms and other service organizations passing AI-generated cost savings directly to clients in the form of fee reductions (8-30%) . For MSPs, especially those on fixed-fee contracts, this competitive dynamic may lead to price-driven client churn unless operational efficiencies can be recaptured as profit or used to accelerate market share gains. The operational challenge is compounded by the need to retrain staff on natural language programming and prevent issues like "AI workslop," where poor-quality outputs from AI waste significant employee time. For MSPs and IT service leaders, the immediate implications are increased pressure to adopt AI for internal gains while managing associated risks to employee engagement, quality, and client retention. Providers must quantify and control the costs and benefits of AI usage, track operational metrics beyond simple time savings (such as deflection percentage and client satisfaction scores), and develop policies to address employee resistance, accountability for errors, and margin dilution. Failing to do so risks loss of market position to more adaptive competitors and exposes firms to both direct and indirect costs associated with ineffective AI integration. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Active vs. Joined Partners: The Overlooked Risk in Vendor Programs | 25 sept. 2026 | 00:13:37 | |
Vendor channel programs are structurally organized around metrics and incentives that prioritize initial partner acquisition over long-term partner viability or growth. Analysis of policies and practices at firms like Dr. Backup, Microsoft, and Arctic Wolf highlights that most vendors track and publish partner sign-ups (“joined”) but seldom disclose the ongoing, active partner count or revenue growth among partners. This structural approach creates a visibility gap and misaligns vendor and partner incentives, presenting ongoing governance risk for MSPs and IT providers. The purchase of Dr. Backup by Hosvara, led by Nancy Henriquez, highlights this disconnect. Public figures claim over 300 partners in the Dr. Backup program, but only 125 are active according to Henriquez—meaning more than half of all partners have left. This attrition is not unique. Industry survey data from Techaisle shows that 72% of vendor incentive spending happens at deal closure, while 41% of MSP revenue derives from renewals. Vendor programs often fail to account for long-term partner success, incentivizing sign-ups instead of sustainability. Additional developments reinforce this structural pattern. Microsoft’s retirement of its Azure Expert MSP tier by January 2027, alongside Arctic Wolf’s introduction of a new partner program tier for smaller MSPs, both reflect vendor-driven changes to partner structure that serve corporate strategy rather than address partner outcomes. Scorecard models and published partner metrics remain opaque to most participants, making it difficult to evaluate the stability or effectiveness of a given partner program. For MSPs and IT leaders, these structural dynamics amplify contract risk and operational complexity. Reliance on vendors that refuse to disclose active or growing partner numbers leaves service providers exposed to sudden program changes, with migration and customer disruption costs that are rarely priced in advance. Practical safeguards include demanding transparent partner retention data during contract negotiations, aligning agreement terms with visible vendor commitments, and budgeting explicitly for client migrations tied to vendor program volatility. 05:26 Vendors Pay For The Sale 07:34 Moved When The Map Changes 10:39 Why Do We Care? Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Flamingo’s AI Token Pricing Model Shifts Margin Risk for MSPs – With Rich Freeman | 24 sept. 2026 | 00:42:38 | |
A growing shift is materializing in the IT services market as software vendors move away from traditional fixed software pricing and towards models based on AI token consumption, effectively redefining the sources of margin and exposing providers to variable cost structures. This transition is embodied by companies such as Flamingo, which has constructed an MSP software suite and prices access at $1 per device per month, including a token allotment, but whose actual profits—and partner costs—are derived from overage on AI token consumption. The fundamental mechanism is that margin is increasingly being earned from metered AI usage rather than the flat software license model that previously dominated the sector. The most consequential development highlighted involves Flamingo’s approach: software fees serve primarily as an entry point, while ongoing, uncapped AI token consumption drives real costs for providers. According to Flamingo, most partners use 10 to 20 times their monthly token allocation, with the overage billed at rates that track costs from AI lab providers such as Anthropic and OpenAI. These rates are variable, not transparently published, and fluctuate as AI model costs change. Flamingo claims incremental margin via internal consumption efficiency, particularly as it plans to host its own models and increase token allotments without reducing partner pricing, consolidating margin from lowered costs. Additional evidence is provided by Integris, a private equity-backed MSP that launched a bundled AI service, Core, currently priced per seat or device despite the product’s purpose being automation and labor reduction. Integris representatives indicated that no stable, customer-aligned outcome-based pricing model has emerged, a challenge echoed by other large MSPs and exemplified by Salesforce’s challenges in usage and outcome-based AI billing. At every level—from the vendor building software on top of AI labs to the MSP implementing services for clients—pricing mechanisms remain unsettled, with risk of misalignment and unpredictability being pushed downstream. For MSPs and technology leaders, these developments introduce new operational risks, chiefly around cost forecasting, pricing transparency, and margin management. The shift to consumption-based and hybrid models increases the burden of monitoring both cost and value delivered from AI-powered services, while lack of clear, measurable outcome units limits the feasibility of outcome-based billing. Providers may find themselves forced to absorb cost variability while delivering fixed-fee services, or to renegotiate contracts and client expectations as variable pricing becomes standard. As AI-related spending rises and billing models remain opaque, effective governance, cost auditing, and risk management become central to sustainable operations.
Supported by: GoTo(LogMeIn) About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Vendors Build the Meter: MSP Risk Rises as AI Usage Moves to Consumption Pricing | 23 sept. 2026 | 00:13:11 | |
The core structural shift discussed is the transition from fixed, seat-based licensing models to metered, consumption-based pricing for artificial intelligence tools. Driving forces behind this change are vendor margin pressures and increasing alignment between costs and actual resource utilization, which is resulting in a measurable difference on invoices rather than announced policy changes. Gartner’s projections indicate that by 2028, over 35% of new corporate legal technology spending will operate on usage-based models, and this trend is evident in technology procurement and vendor billing practices. Key evidence is provided by data from Accenture and Gartner. Accenture’s survey of 750 executives found that only one in five dollars spent on AI token usage can be traced to clear financial outcomes, while Gartner estimates global AI spending will reach $2.7 trillion in 2026, mainly on infrastructure. CIOs are frequently unaware of embedded AI costs, with untracked usage and spending increasing accordingly. Deloitte reported that 31% of UK workers use generative AI at work without employer knowledge, and 17% cover these tools out of pocket, totaling £958 million. Further supporting this shift, BambooHR data shows that 42% of AI tool usage time involves troubleshooting or prompt iteration, equating to roughly 20 workdays per user per year—an activity that becomes billable under consumption models. Vendors like Addigy are rolling out monitoring suites to track shadow AI usage and enforce compliance, while routing platforms such as OpenRouter guarantee data residency and track counts at a granular level. Across the technology stack, billing and consumption visibility are concentrated with vendors, leaving service providers and clients without independent reconciliations. Operational implications for MSPs and IT leaders center around contract exposure, accountability, and the need for defensible consumption tracking. Service providers face the choice between reselling metered AI services (and absorbing variability inside fixed-price contracts) or focusing on policy, instrumentation, and independent usage measurement. Practical safeguards include establishing clear roles in AI procurement, conducting usage amnesties to inventory real adoption, and maintaining independent records to validate vendor invoices and mitigate dispute risks. The absence of such mechanisms increases exposure to unexpected billings and client dissatisfaction.
00:00 The Bill Nobody Can Check 03:40 You Pay For Every Retry 06:26 The Meter Isn't Yours 09:56 Why Do We Care? Supported by: ScalePad About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Insurers Exclude AI From Liability: What CG 40 47 Means for MSPs | 22 sept. 2026 | 00:13:45 | |
The episode details a structural shift in the allocation of risk and liability for artificial intelligence within commercial insurance policies, driven by changes in standard policy language published by Verisk’s ISO division. Insurance carriers are now able to explicitly exclude claims related to generative AI from general liability coverage using endorsements such as CG 40 47, CG 40 48, and CG 35 08, which attach at policy renewal without formal notification. This trend is not confined to general liability but extends across trade, directors and officers, and cyber policies, with companies like W.R. Berkley filing for broader absolute AI exclusions. Supporting evidence centers on the rising financial exposure associated with AI-related incidents. Chubb’s Cyber Claims Report found the average large company claim increased to $4.4 million, doubling year over year, while mid-market claims rose 22%, even as the total number of claims declined. Sophos and OneTrust research indicates that MSPs are increasingly being relied upon as de facto CISOs and that nearly half of organizations have experienced unapproved AI actions within the past year, highlighting the escalating operational and financial risks for service providers. Additional developments reinforce the shift of accountability downstream to service providers. The MSP Alliance has updated its Unified Certification Standard (version 4.0) to explicitly govern AI-enabled services with requirements such as approval, monitoring, and evidence collection. Meanwhile, legislative efforts remain stalled, as the Durbin-Hawley bill to classify AI as a product sits in committee without movement. Simultaneously, cases such as Google's Gemini model interacting with live systems demonstrate gaps in external disclosure and enforceability, leaving service providers with limited recourse. For MSPs and IT leaders, the operational implications are immediate. AI exclusions now often attach silently at policy renewal, making it critical to review insurance documents in detail rather than relying on summaries. Providers must leverage written client acceptance for AI activities, clarify contract scopes, and scrutinize vendor support agreements for clear boundaries of responsibility. Failure to address these areas exposes service providers to uninsured risks, with consequential liability likely to be litigated as a service failure rather than a product defect. 00:00 Insurers Are Backing Out 03:38 Why Nobody Upstream Pays 06:38 The Bill With No Address 09:40 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| All-in-One or Best-of-Breed? The Real Tradeoffs in Your Security | 20 sept. 2026 | 00:39:18 | |
Vendor channel consolidation continues to shape decision-making for MSPs, as the industry evaluates tradeoffs between integrated security stacks and maintaining best-of-breed toolsets. The episode’s discussion centers on the role of platform consolidation, referencing Guardz as an example of a provider leveraging third-party engines like SentinelOne for EDR and Check Point/Avanan for email, shifting focus from proprietary tool development to deep integration and operational unification. This shift reflects broader industry movement away from fragmented tooling toward unified security operations designed specifically for MSP and SMB environments. The primary evidence highlighted is the operational friction and compromises created by legacy all-in-one approaches, which often involved aggregating standalone tools without meaningful integration, leading to inefficiencies and substandard outcomes. Doni Brass detailed Guardz’s initial strategy of building proprietary AV and EDR products, ultimately conceding the inability to match specialist vendors’ effectiveness. The current Guardz model combines licensing and unified management for technologies like SentinelOne, managed through a single point of support and tied together with an identity-centric architecture. The operational benefit, according to Doni Brass, is streamlined onboarding, reduced tool sprawl, and simpler day-to-day management. Supporting developments reinforcing the structural channel consolidation theme include user poll data indicating a split among MSPs: some using under three security vendors, others supporting four to eight, and a minority historically managing as many as 15. The discussion also addresses the risks associated with consolidation—namely increased dependency on single-vendor platforms, reduced flexibility to swap components, and potential compliance shortcomings for high-regulation sectors such as CMMC-restricted defense contractors. Doni Brass acknowledged Gardz’s lack of CMMC certification and identified large, mature MSPs with internal SOCs as less likely to benefit from consolidated stacks unless targeting downmarket segments. For operators, the main implications concern assessment of operational risk, contract liability, and long-term agility. Single-platform solutions can simplify onboarding and management but may introduce lock-in, especially if multi-year contracts are involved. Doni Brass recommended favoring short-term agreements and avoiding exposing specific vendor brands in client-facing deliverables to maintain stack flexibility. Growing reliance on unified platforms demands thorough trial evaluation and continued scrutiny of channel strategy and compliance postures, as vendor pivots and regulatory expectations can change with little notice. Careful governance remains necessary to mitigate both strategic and operational downside. Sponsored by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Dave Cava on Why Operational Maturity, Not AI, Determines MSP Survival | 19 sept. 2026 | 00:20:19 | |
Margin pressure, driven by a widening profitability gap among MSPs, is the primary structural shift highlighted in this discussion. According to Dave Cava, industry data shows that over half of MSPs operate at less than 5% profitability, while around 27% are running at a loss. Larger and better-funded MSPs are leveraging resources to accelerate adoption of new technologies such as AI, increasing competitive risk for smaller providers that lack operational maturity and financial resilience. The discussion identified concrete data on workforce dynamics and hiring models as significant, with PeopleSharp internal figures revealing a 30-day gap between presenting a hiring candidate and accepted offers, attributed to process inefficiency on the MSP side. Additionally, Dave Cava referenced market research (Saya) showing a jump from 9% to 16% of MSPs struggling to find qualified technicians, despite a labor market some perceive as soft. This further intensifies pressure on mid-sized and smaller MSPs with limited recruiting power, especially as staffing expectations and willingness to work on-site have been drastically altered post-COVID. Secondary developments include the evolving structure of technical teams and career ladders. Traditional L1-to-L3 progression is under scrutiny as automation and AI begin to erode the volume of entry-level roles. While the shift is gradual, Dave Cava noted that "talent factories," or MSPs able to internally develop staff, are increasingly necessary. Process and operational maturity, not early AI adoption alone, are indicated as pre-requisites for sustainable growth, as merely adding new technology does not solve the underlying margin or process challenges. For MSPs and IT leaders, these dynamics translate to concrete operational risks: underestimating cost structure, slow hiring processes, and reliance on commoditized pricing expose businesses to margin erosion and slow response to market shifts. Building robust, value-based pricing strategies, investing in internal talent development, and streamlining hiring and onboarding are positioned as necessary—but not sufficient—conditions for survival. Rapid AI adoption without foundational process discipline creates more risk than opportunity in the current market landscape. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Entry-Level Tech Roles Shrink with Automation; Senior Talent Harder to Acquire and Afford | 18 sept. 2026 | 00:15:09 | |
The episode outlines a structural shift in managed services and IT operations: the automation and unbundling of junior technical work due to the integration of automated tools and AI-driven solutions. This change is absorbing the traditional entry-level, apprenticeship-oriented roles within MSPs and IT organizations, fundamentally altering career development pathways. The trend is illustrated by specific product launches and research findings from entities such as TeamViewer, RDE Technologies, the Center for an Urban Future, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and SignalFire. Primary evidence centers on quantitative labor data. According to the Center for an Urban Future, entry-level tech job postings in New York City declined 49% since 2022, while Bureau of Labor Statistics projections show a 3% decline in employment for computer support specialists by 2035, amounting to a reduction of 24,300 roles. At the same time, new graduate hiring at large technology firms and startups has dropped by 65% and 76%, respectively, according to SignalFire. In contrast, higher-skilled technology roles—including data scientists and security analysts—are forecasted to add over 310,000 positions over the same timeframe. Secondary developments reinforce the trend. TeamViewer released a support agent that automates fixes with senior technician approval, while RDE Technologies adopted a tool (Vight) automating ticket notes, time entries, and coaching data from support calls. These tools reduce learning opportunities for junior staff. On the hiring side, research highlights that junior hires are arriving at pay rates equal to or above existing staff, creating training, motivation, and retention challenges. At the senior end, a noticeable increase in exits from AI-exposed professions among older workers represents a further supply squeeze. The operational implication for MSPs and IT leaders is a direct challenge to traditional hiring and talent development strategies. Automation is reducing the volume of teachable, ticket-based tasks necessary for hands-on training, while elevating compensation for new and senior staff. MSPs face a choice: deliberately reserve real client work for skill development—accepting lower margins to “manufacture” future engineers—or compete for costly senior talent amid a shrinking candidate pool. Budgeting for training must become an explicit, defended line item, and pricing should reflect the operational burden of nurturing internal talent versus buying it on the open market. 00:00 The Job That Stopped Existing 03:48 Built Out Of Easy Tickets 06:54 The Engineer Isn't For Sale 11:03 Why Do We Care? Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Jay McBain on Why AI and SaaS Marketplaces Are Redefining MSP Revenue Models | 17 sept. 2026 | 00:36:22 | |
The dominant structural shift outlined is an accelerating concentration of market power and operational control within a handful of large technology companies and platforms, exacerbated by aggressive vendor channel consolidation and a move toward marketplace-based service delivery. This concentration is evidenced by recent actions such as Broadcom’s decision to cut roughly 90% of VMware’s partners and take top-tier accounts direct, as well as the increasing tendency of hyperscalers and major vendors—including Microsoft, AWS, and Google—to funnel services and resources directly through their own marketplaces and forward-deployed engineering teams. Reports discussed, such as the Omdia Global Partner 1000, reinforce the extent to which the industry has pivoted toward highly scaled players at the expense of smaller channel partners and MSPs. Evidence from the Omdia Global Partner 1000 report demonstrates that the top 30 service partners now generate the same amount of revenue as the bottom 970 combined, with the remaining 970 firms outperforming over a million additional smaller providers. The managed services market was noted at $608 billion—1.5 times the size of the global SaaS industry and all hyperscalers—yet smaller MSPs report decreased growth expectations and declining vendor satisfaction; for example, satisfaction in the UK and Ireland dropped from 37% to 19%. Further, partner programs for generative AI remain underdeveloped, with over 90% at only “maturity 3 of 10,” while 82% of MSPs acknowledge they are not prepared to scale as rapidly as customer demand for AI-driven outcomes will require. Additional developments deepening this concentration include widespread launches of vendor-controlled marketplaces and the growth of token-based consumption models. Companies such as SuperOps, ManageEngine, and Pax8 are positioning their platforms as marketplaces for MSP-delivered AI and SaaS, while Microsoft and AWS continue to expand both their direct-to-customer strategy and investments in pre-sale technical resources. Analysts project that the shift toward token-based billing and variable consumption will disrupt traditional per-user pricing, limiting future margin opportunities and accelerating direct transactional relationships between vendors and end-customers. For MSPs and service providers, these shifts increase dependency on large vendor platforms, raise the risk of abrupt contract changes, and intensify pricing and margin pressure. Traditional models relying on single-source vendor relationships and predictable per-user or per-device billing are likely to be replaced by variable, consumption-based contracts governed by token usage and direct marketplace transactions. Providers must prepare for heightened governance requirements, increased operational complexity in managing multi-vendor and multi-marketplace integrations, and potential threats to their role as strategic intermediaries in client accounts. Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Loss of Vendor-Free MSP Spaces: ASCII Acquisition Means New Risks for Peer Conversations | 16 sept. 2026 | 00:13:49 | |
The core structural shift analyzed is the consolidation of service provider-only peer communities into trade associations representing the entire technology channel, including vendors, distributors, and service providers. This shift is illustrated by the acquisition of the ASCII Group, a 42-year-old peer network for independent IT businesses, by the Global Technology Industry Association (GTIA), which counts vendors such as Sophos and Pax8 among its leadership. The transaction led to about 1,000 ASCII members joining GTIA’s 3,000 member companies, with ASCII member dues dropping by approximately 25%, continued use of the ASCII brand, and preservation of regional events, according to GTIA and details reported by CRN. The deal followed the death of ASCII founder Alan Weinberger and the association’s sale by his family. Official communications framed the result as a benefit for members, with GTIA’s leadership emphasizing reduced costs and expansion of benefits. The episode highlights that these two organizations were fundamentally built on opposite membership models: ASCII as a service-provider-only peer room, and GTIA as a trade body encompassing vendors, service providers, resellers, and other channel actors. The merger means the vendor-inclusive model supersedes the exclusive peer-room structure. While operational changes are framed as positive, the consolidation eliminates the guarantee of vendor-free conversations—now, what was previously a closed peer group is just one optional add-on in a vendor-inclusive association. For MSPs and IT leaders, this shift increases dependency on cross-channel associations and removes an environment for fully candid, vendor-free discussions that can inform pricing, contract negotiations, and peer benchmarking. Price reductions are the only change reflected on invoices, while the loss of a controlled guest list is a less visible but material product change. Operators are advised to audit where they obtain operational intelligence and reconsider the role and value of peer-only communities for competitive negotiation and unconflicted advice, recognizing that such spaces may become niche or disappear entirely if consolidation continues. 00:00 The Deal Everyone Liked https://businessof.tech/2026/09/16/the-room-with-no-vendors-in-it/ 04:27 Two Ideas Of Membership 07:02 Nobody Got A Vote 10:22 Why Do We Care?
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| AI Channel Programs Shift Forecasting Risk to MSPs as Vendor Sales Fall Short | 15 sept. 2026 | 00:12:36 | |
The episode reveals a structural transfer of forecasting and adoption risk from AI vendors to managed service providers (MSPs) and IT service organizations. Five companies—CyberFOX, Intezer, Sophos, Flamingo, and Charles IT—have taken distinct strategies to expand AI capabilities within the channel, underscoring a coordinated attempt to shift the uncertainty of AI demand, usage, and revenue forecasting off vendors’ balance sheets and onto service providers. A central data point comes from Gartner’s survey of over 1,300 technology leaders at companies above $50 million in revenue: fewer than one in four have successfully scaled an AI project across business units, even as 85% plan to increase AI investment and many cannot quantify current spending. Analysts note a move away from flat-rate subscriptions toward usage-based AI pricing, significantly increasing projected IT costs through 2035 for customers. The episode highlights that vendors are pre-building AI channel programs with the expectation that third-party providers will absorb both commitment risk and customer deployment burdens. Supporting evidence includes announcement details: CyberFOX’s new North American deal with Ingram Micro, Intezer’s launch of a comprehensive partner portal, Sophos’s OpenAI integration targeting MSPs, Flamingo’s open-source AI agent platform, and Charles IT’s acquisition of Descent, an AI-native MSP. Spending data from Ramp and adoption surveys from the Census Bureau and Futurum Group further illustrate the gap between stated AI success and actual operational adoption, elucidating systemic uncertainty and reporting bias in AI project returns. For MSPs and IT leaders, the implications are clear: the structural shift means channel programs increasingly pass fixed commitments and usage volatility to service firms while providing little guaranteed demand. Practical safeguards include independently counting and verifying clients with active, process-integrated AI adoption before entering distribution contracts. Defining specific, outcome-focused criteria for adoption can protect against being tied to overambitious vendor forecasts, allowing providers to negotiate terms on verifiable demand rather than projections that vendors themselves could not convert. 03:41 The Forecast That Didn't Convert 06:29 Nobody Can Prove The Demand 09:38 Why Do We Care? Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Reseller, MSP, Services Merged: Structural Risks and Rewards in Barracuda’s Program – Michelle Hodges | 14 sept. 2026 | 00:13:26 | |
Barracuda’s recent unification of its reseller, MSP, and services programs into a single partner success structure highlights a continuing trend toward channel consolidation and streamlined partner management among technology vendors. This realignment is designed to provide partners with a unified interface and consistent experience, moving away from segmented, product-specific engagement and instead centralizing processes, portals, and incentives under one program. The most consequential operational development is the consolidation of partner access points, reducing from seven disparate logins to a single portal. According to Barracuda, this centralization supports not only transactional activity but also encompasses partner enablement, updated certifications, automation of onboarding, and incentives tied to the entire customer lifecycle. The company reports that partner engagement through the new portal has exceeded prior benchmarks by over 20% compared to the previous period, with error rates reported below 10%. Supporting developments include Barracuda’s adjustment of program features such as launching “Barracuda ONE” and Mastery certifications, adding compliance and AI-focused badges, and introducing a buy-now feature tailored for lower-volume purchases. The company also referenced plans to further modernize renewals, contracts, and support structures to address common channel complaints in billing, contract flexibility, and support availability. For MSPs and IT providers, these changes shift operational dynamics by consolidating vendor dependence and reducing administrative friction, but may also introduce risks related to program uniformity and centralized governance. Reliance on a single vendor-managed platform can concentrate risk if features or support become limiting for certain business models. MSPs should assess the tradeoffs of standardized engagement versus flexibility—especially for scenarios like minimum seat requirements and variable contract terms—and scrutinize the alignment between partner incentives and evolving compliance and technology demands. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| What MSP Operators Overlook in Operations Before Selling—Insights from Evergreen’s Craig Fulton | 12 sept. 2026 | 00:15:29 | |
The episode highlights the ongoing consolidation of the MSP sector, driven by acquisition-focused entities like Evergreen Services Group. This structural mechanism centers on long-term acquisition strategies and the operational integration of MSPs, with Evergreen positioning itself as a permanent holder rather than a market aggregator intent on short-term profit. The discussion underscores how private equity-backed firms operate within multi-market IT services, spanning managed services, application support, and specialized government contracts. Evergreen Services Group reports completing 47 acquisitions in the previous year, now owning 135 MSPs and 171 companies overall, with stated revenues of $1.5 billion and $250 million EBITDA. According to Craig Fulton, the company’s standard acquisition model typically offers 90% of enterprise value in cash at closing, with a remaining 10% tied to a one-year earnout dependent on 15% EBITDA growth. Quality of earnings assessments and customer renewal health are described as primary factors that can stall or terminate deals, particularly if financial accounts lack clarity or significant customer dissatisfaction emerges. A recurring operational gap identified by Evergreen in acquisition targets is the absence of a dedicated growth leader within firms, which raises post-sale continuity risks. While questions were raised about the possibility of acquisitions inadvertently generating new competition in local markets—through staff departures and new businesses—no substantive evidence was cited that this has impacted consolidation effectiveness or market saturation. The dialogue also explored Evergreen’s investor structure and commitment to transparency about backend ownership and fund relationships with sellers, with claims of a high earnout payment rate and seller satisfaction. For MSPs and IT leaders, the practical implications involve heightened scrutiny of operational maturity, especially in finance and client management roles, to realize sustained valuation and minimize deal-related risk. Vendor dependency deepens post-acquisition, as Evergreen leverages consolidated contracts to meet earnout targets. Owners not seeking to sell are advised to reassess account management practices, explore targeted AI integration for client engagement, and maintain competitive EBITDA performance, as independently managed firms continue to demonstrate strong profitability metrics.
About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Silent Disqualification Risks Rise as UK Platforms and US Buyers Automate MSP Selection | 11 sept. 2026 | 00:12:28 | |
The episode reveals a structural shift toward eligibility thresholds and silent disqualification in the managed services sector, driven primarily by large vendors and regulatory buyers. Companies now establish non-negotiable numerical thresholds—such as cloud revenue minimums or cryptography certifications—as criteria that MSPs must meet to maintain channel access or bid eligibility. Key organizations shaping these dynamics include Microsoft, which has reduced its global distributor base by two-thirds, and regulatory buyers who increasingly rely on FIPS 140-3 cryptography validation as a procurement gate. The most consequential development discussed is Microsoft’s reduction of its distributor partners from approximately 180 to roughly 60, based on a $30 million annual cloud solution provider revenue threshold per region, or $1 million for direct bill partners, according to Scott Frew of iAsset. Concurrently, regulated buyers are disqualifying MSPs whose tools lack FIPS 140-3 validated cryptography, a certification that requires third-party verification and is referenced by procurement officials as a hard requirement. The Managed Services Journal and vendor press releases provide evidence that this filtering mechanism now operates prior to any sales engagement, largely outside the control or even awareness of affected MSPs. Supporting developments reinforce this threshold-driven landscape. CompareIT in the UK has launched an AI-driven platform to assess over 8,000 MSPs on up to 197 criteria, allowing buyers to shortlist providers before direct interactions. Vendors are responding by integrating compliance features (such as Datto RMM adding FIPS 140-3 support) without extra cost, turning compliance into a baseline rather than a differentiator. Third-party products and partnerships are emerging—like RYTHMz’ SCOUTz or the Senteon and SPECTRA alliance—to supply objective evidence of eligibility, making attestation a commodity and part of a burgeoning industry. For MSPs and IT leaders, the operational implication is a shift from sales-driven competition to eligibility-driven access. Risks arise from losing channel relationships, not keeping up with compliance requirements, or being silently excluded from consideration in regulated deals. Ensuring a clear owner for validation data, maintaining up-to-date records of distributor status, and proactively verifying the business’s public profile now represent concrete governance requirements. Eligibility is becoming a precondition for market participation—those who manage it systematically maintain market access while others are removed without notification. 00:00 Three Thresholds, Three Weeks 03:42 Cheaper Than A Conversation 06:06 You'll Never Get The No 09:12 Why Do We Care? Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Sharon Florentine on Why Most SMBs Deploy AI Without Budgets or Governance | 10 sept. 2026 | 00:11:32 | |
The episode highlights a pronounced governance gap in how small and mid-sized businesses (SMBs) are adopting artificial intelligence (AI) tools and services. New research from GTIA, discussed by Sharon Florentine, identifies that while AI use has become nearly universal among SMB end customers of IT service providers, most lack formal policies, leadership, and budgeting structure around their deployment of AI. This reflects a foundational misalignment between AI adoption rates and organizational preparedness. According to the GTIA study, 97–98% of surveyed SMBs are already using AI to some extent, yet only 20–25% do so strategically. Strategic usage is defined by having AI under a leadership role, with established policies and procedures. In addition, only around one-quarter of respondents reported having a dedicated AI budget. This suggests that despite broad AI integration, most spending is ad hoc or drawn from unrelated IT priorities. The research surveyed 520 SMBs across 11 verticals, reinforcing the generalizability of the findings. Supporting discussions emphasized that this misalignment is both an opportunity and a risk for MSPs and ITSPs. Unaddressed gaps in governance, budgeting, and cybersecurity may undermine value delivery and create liability issues. Practical challenges—such as unclear funding sources, lack of proactive customer engagement, and potential cybersecurity risks tied to unmanaged AI use—were described as persistent pain points. It was also noted that shifting to a proactive approach is essential for building trust and effective client partnerships. For MSPs and IT leaders, the operational implications center on the need to address governance and budget planning for AI while maintaining a focus on established IT infrastructure. Relying solely on existing processes may introduce unmanaged risk, particularly as customers expand AI use without adequate oversight. Providers are advised to prepare by developing frameworks for AI budgeting, security controls, and policy development, rather than diverting focus from foundational IT services. Neglecting core infrastructure and data practices in pursuit of unstructured AI integration was identified as a critical operational miscalculation.
Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| DMARC Adoption Exposes Organizational Gaps: Controls Exist but Go Unused | 09 sept. 2026 | 00:12:44 | |
A central structural shift discussed is the acceleration of security risk and remediation cycles driven by AI-powered tooling available to both attackers and defenders. The episode highlights that the difference between offensive and defensive capabilities now depends less on underlying technology and more on access controls and permission settings, as demonstrated by offerings and incidents involving Anthropic, OpenAI, Cloudflare, and tool vulnerabilities in products from Connectwise and Enable. Primary evidence of this shift includes the use of advanced AI models and agent frameworks, which have enabled attackers to compress the timeline for successful ransomware intrusions to under 10 hours, according to Unit 42 and The Register. On the defense side, Cloudflare and OpenAI announced an early access service leveraging Daybreak models (including GPT 5.6 Cyber) for vulnerability detection and suggested patching, subject to human review. Meanwhile, Microsoft implemented a policy throttling unpatched Exchange servers until remediation occurs, rather than relying on voluntary patching, marking a move towards enforced maintenance in vendor ecosystems. Supporting developments underline the blurred line between offense and defense: Anthropic’s simultaneous release of two AI models (Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1) with identical capabilities but different access restrictions based on user vetting, and OpenAI’s promotion of its GPT-6 Astra model’s security testing performance, while applying safeguard layers to limit exploit generation. Reports from Hack the Box and Red Sift, citing increased enterprise adoption of AI for both security assessment and attack surface discovery, reinforce that automation now exposes vulnerabilities faster than traditional remediation processes can keep pace. The operational implication for MSPs and IT service providers is that speed of decision-making—particularly client approval for emergency remediation—has become a critical risk control point. The analysis underscores that technical controls and cyber insurance arrangements are frequently untrusted or unused, leaving actual exposure governed by change management logistics. Providers are advised to formalize rapid approval clauses and escalation contacts in contracts, shifting from hypothetical scenarios to incorporating real vendor disclosures as triggers. This adjustment is positioned as a necessary response to a landscape in which exploits and mitigations move at comparable velocity, and traditional maintenance rhythms no longer align with risk movement. 00:00 The Intruder Left A Report 04:17 Same Model, Different Door 06:44 Configured, Never Turned On 09:47 Why Do We Care? Supported by: About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||
| Slide’s Flexible Contracts: Balancing Client Retention and Revenue Risk - Carlson Choi | 08 sept. 2026 | 00:21:36 | |
A central structural shift discussed is the growing pressure on margins and operational risk, driven by the competing models of vendor platform integration versus modular, best-in-breed solutions for managed service providers. Slide, a backup and disaster recovery vendor with roughly 1,000 partners, serves as an example of a company resisting long-term, bundled contracts and instead favoring a highly flexible, monthly engagement model. This approach reflects a broader industry debate over contract structure, integration depth, and the risk of vendor dependency. Slide argues that month-to-month agreements offer MSPs operational agility, while conceding these contracts heighten vendor-side financial unpredictability and require more proactive account management. The company acknowledges consistent partner requests for longer-term deals, mainly to secure better pricing or manage risk, but maintains that flexibility takes precedence. The result is a dynamic in which vendors bear greater short-term churn risk in exchange for heightened accountability. Secondary discussion critiques the “single pane of glass” approach found in many vendor stacks. Slide claims current market consolidations mostly deliver superficial integration—such as unified login—while failing to address the operational inefficiencies of managing backup across multiple platforms. True interoperability remains limited, and MSPs often pay a process penalty, with searches and recoveries split across separate product silos. Attempts to automate recovery and search using AI offer partial relief but can introduce new risks if processes are not robust. For MSP organizations, these developments reinforce the importance of scrutinizing vendor contracts for embedded risk, especially as flexibility increases exposure to abrupt churn. The tradeoff between interoperability and platform lock-in demands attention to operational readiness, governance, and resource planning. Smaller providers, in particular, should weigh the support and integration limits of their partners against the risks of fragmented tooling and short-term agreements. About Business of Tech: The daily MSP news and analysis podcast for managed service providers and IT services leaders. Host Dave Sobel covers AI for MSPs, MSP pricing and profitability, MSP M&A and private equity, vendor partner programs, MSP cybersecurity and liability, and MSP operations — and answers the question every story raises: Why do we care? Produced by MSP Radio. 💼 All Our SponsorsMSP Radio is supported by our partners: 🚀 Join Business of Tech Plus Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more. 👉 https://businessof.tech/plus 🎧 Subscribe to the Business of Tech Want the show on your favorite podcast app or prefer the written versions of each story? 📲 https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe 📰 Story Links & Sources Looking for the links from today’s stories? Every episode script — with full source links — is posted at: 🎙 Want to Be a Guest? Pitch your story or appear on Business of Tech: Daily MSP News & IT Services Analysis 💬 https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech 🔗 Follow Business of Tech
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079 YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftech Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising. | |||