News Analysis
White Paper
The Future of Leadership Development: AI-Driven Manager Enablement
On July 1, Microsoft 365 customers were greeted with four big changes landing on a single day: list price increases on E3 and E5, unassigned licenses renewing automatically at the new rates, departed or disabled accounts still holding paid seats until someone manually intervenes, and SharePoint storage moving from absorbed cost to pay-as-you-go billing.
Adding to this is a new top-tier SKU, M365 E7 or the Frontier Worker suite, a tiered rollout of Agent 365, and three different billing models across Copilot, Copilot Cowork and Microsoft Scout.
The company didn't make a big announcement about the changes. Each had its own timeline, its own admin center notice and its own justification.
Microsoft 365 E3 is rising from $36 to $39 per user per month and E5 from $57 to $60. Neither figure looks dramatic on its own. But given the timing with the suite-wide packaging change and new AI billing architecture, it reads a little differently.
The question IT and digital workplace leaders face right now is whether this is the ordinary mess of a company shipping fast across multiple product lines or a structure that quietly favors Microsoft when customers don't act.
Microsoft 365 Price Hikes Do the Real Damage
The price increases carry the most weight of the four changes, Orchestry CEO Michael Pisarek told Reworked.
"Unassigned licenses have always been an issue, but with the price increases, this will become even more of a burden," Pisarek said.
In his view, E7 is a secondary concern for most tenants right now, arriving before many organizations have caught up with what they already own. E7 will likely land too early for organizations that aren't yet using the full capabilities of their current E5 licensing, Pisarek continued.
Cybersecurity Link founder and director Steve Sharma views the changes less as administrative housekeeping and more as a governance failure waiting to happen.
Microsoft's overhaul, Sharma said, "isn't just administrative complexity, it's a new attack surface for budget bloat." His worry is less about any single change and more about ownership. If IT, finance and end users are left to untangle things on their own, he suspects cost overruns are close to guaranteed. That compounding effect is real: EA discount removal already pushed large enterprises' effective increases closer to 20% before the July price rise even landed.
Microsoft 365 Frontier Suite: A Consolidation or Premature Upsell?
Sharma and Pisarek both agree on the complexity the changes introduce, but have different takes on what customers should do in response.
Moving from E5 plus Copilot to E7 runs "around another $20" per seat, Pisarek estimates, and whether that's worth paying comes down to specific use. Organizations already using Agent 365 for AI governance or paying separately for what the Frontier Suite bundles stand to benefit the most, he said, adding that the math depends heavily on how a customer has configured its existing licenses and how many pure Copilot seats it holds.
Sequencing is his real objection, not value. Asked whether the Frontier Suite represents genuine consolidation or a way of bundling four products before customers can properly assess them, Pisarek leans toward consolidation, with a condition attached: it makes sense for organizations "all-in on the Microsoft 365 platform" and already using most of what they're licensed for.
Most organizations aren't there yet, Pisarek said, and need a clearer read on their own maturity before making the move.
Sharma's proposed fix sidesteps the maturity argument and goes straight to process. He recommends aligning "E7 bundles to actual value" by mapping every SKU against justified usage rather than accepting the upgrade path as the default.
Storage billing exposes cost, not sprawl
Pisarek provides a useful distinction on the SharePoint change, splitting what appears to be one issue into two.
Organizations already paying Microsoft for extra storage through fixed-capacity packs stand to benefit from pay-as-you-go billing, Pisarek said. But the sprawl sitting inside a tenant doesn't change because the billing model changed. It stays exactly the same, regardless of which model a customer is under, he notes.
Read that way, the storage change isn't a forcing function for cleanup. It's a bill for something that was already there, just itemized for the first time. It sits alongside a second, less visible packaging change: E5 and E7 customers are also being handed a capped allocation of Security Copilot capacity, 400 compute units per 1,000 licenses, capped at 10,000 a month, a limit that security teams running promptbooks and integrated investigations could burn through quickly.
3 Billing Models, 1 Budget Headache
AI billing is another area Pisarek and Sharma approach from different angles. Copilot Cowork's usage-based credits sit on top of a flat per-seat Copilot license. Microsoft Scout, still confined to the Frontier preview, has no published general availability pricing at all.
Budgeting for that right now is "very difficult," Pisarek says, though he expects Microsoft to close the gap soon.
His bigger concern is architectural rather than financial. Scout runs on GitHub Copilot credits rather than Microsoft 365's own billing surface, a structure unlike anything else in the suite, Pisarek notes. If that holds through general availability, organizations will need to track GitHub as a separate cost and license center just to understand their AI spend, on top of everything sitting inside the Microsoft 365 admin center.
In contrast, Sharma applies a single standard across all three tiers rather than treating each product's mechanics separately. He recommends testing every seat against measurable productivity or security gain instead of tracking each billing quirk in isolation.
Engaged, But Not Convinced: What's Eroding Beneath Your Strongest Engagement Numbers
Watch Now
Retention Is a Communication Problem: New Data from 6,000+ Employees
Watch Now
Both Sharma and Pisarek see the three billing models across three related products as a genuine design choice. Where they part ways is on the fix.
Pisarek's approach is diagnostic: assess actual usage maturity, product by product, before adding another tier. Sharma's is procedural: govern all of it uniformly, the way a security team would govern any other risk surface.
"The vendors won't simplify," Sharma says. "But we can."
What Customers Are Actually Paying For
Neither Pisarek or Sharma see the July 1 changes as ill-intentioned. But they both see a structure where inaction costs the customer money and action demands more internal coordination than most IT and finance teams currently have in place.
If unassigned licenses default to renewing, if storage sprawl was already invisible before the meter started running and if a product like Scout can go from Frontier preview to embedded dependency before its pricing model is even public, the question left is how much of that was ever optional to begin with — and how much of it Microsoft was counting on customers not noticing until the invoice.