‘Blackmail’: £9m Council Microsoft Renewal Shows the Real Cost of Vendor Lock-In

Warwickshire County Council’s cabinet has approved a three–year Microsoft 365 licence renewal worth about £9m, running from June 2027 to May 2030. At roughly £3m a year, it is about £375,000 — 15% — more than the council currently pays. The decision itself was not unusual. What made it news was the language used in the room. When a Green councillor described the arrangement as a trap, the council’s former leader, Reform UK’s Rob Howard, did not dispute the word “blackmail”. “We have no choice on this occasion, I’m afraid,” he said. “You’re right, we don’t want to be held with this sort of blackmail over the next 10 years. It is going to be more next time round.”

Howard’s explanation for having no choice is the part every organisation should note: there was too little time to build a viable alternative before the licences expire in May 2027. A separate Computer Weekly analysis of Freedom of Information responses found that 32 of 37 English councils have never run a competitive procurement in which an alternative to Microsoft could have won. The case arrives as the Competition and Markets Authority considers designating Microsoft with strategic market status, precisely because of switching barriers that make it hard to use rival providers alongside or instead of Microsoft. Whatever one thinks of the language used, the mechanics are familiar well beyond local government. Lock–in is often less about technology than about the calendar: by the time a renewal is due, it is too late to have an alternative ready.

What the council approved, and why it said it had no choice

The decision report was introduced by councillor Michael Bannister, who attributed the increase principally to Microsoft’s pricing changes across the public sector. The previous renewal had deferred increases by continuing existing national pricing arrangements, so this renewal is where those changes land. Around 900 licences are being charged to relevant business areas, and optional add–on products could push the final cost higher. The agreement is further complicated by local government reorganisation, with licence numbers and transfers still to be resolved.

The council’s report set out the risk of not renewing: “poorer commercial outcomes and disruption to essential digital services”. That is the core of the problem. A council — or a business — whose email, documents, calendars, collaboration and often identity all run on one platform cannot simply stop paying when a renewal price rises. Without a tested alternative, the realistic choice is between renewing and risking disruption to essential services. Few organisations will choose disruption.

Green councillor Keith Kondakor made the point vividly. Holding up a 40–year–old floppy disk, he contrasted owning software outright in 1983 with today’s subscription model: “The problem now is that we’re getting trapped into paying licence fees. We licence for a year or three years and then Microsoft can whack the price up.” Rob Howard, the former leader and now portfolio holder for economy, agreed with the substance, and his reason for nonetheless approving the renewal was practical: there was not enough time to build a viable alternative before May 2027.

It is worth being clear about whose words these are. “Blackmail” and “trapped” are the councillors’ characterisations, made in a political setting, not findings. Microsoft’s position in the CMA’s wider investigation is that it operates in a vigorously competitive market and faces real rivals. The CMA’s provisional view, however, is that customers find it genuinely difficult to switch away from Microsoft or combine it with other providers — and Warwickshire’s experience is a concrete example of what that difficulty looks like in practice.

The wider data point is striking. Computer Weekly’s analysis of Freedom of Information responses from 37 English councils found that 32 had never run a competitive procurement process in which an alternative to Microsoft could have won the contract. If an alternative is never allowed to compete, its absence at renewal time is not surprising — it was never developed.

From a floppy disk to a £9m subscription

The sequence below draws on the reporting. Councillor Kondakor’s floppy disk provides the starting point; the rest follows the renewal and the regulatory context around it.

The timeline makes one thing plain. The council’s decision was taken this autumn, but its options were set much earlier. If an alternative was going to be ready by May 2027, the work to identify, test and procure it would have needed to begin long before. The same applies to the next renewal in 2030: if Warwickshire, or any organisation in a similar position, wants a genuine choice then, the time to start preparing is now, not in late 2029.

Where the leverage at renewal actually comes from

The chart below is an indicative planning model — not measured data — ranking pieces of work by how much they contribute to having a real choice when a major software renewal is due. The point it makes is that the negotiation itself is the smallest part.

Most of the leverage is created long before anyone sits down to negotiate. Knowing what depends on the platform, having proven that data can be moved, and having at least piloted an alternative are what make a vendor take the possibility of leaving seriously. Without that groundwork, a renewal negotiation is mostly a conversation about how much to accept. Warwickshire’s former leader effectively described the bottom bar: a renewal arriving with no alternative ready.

The fifth bar connects to the Computer Weekly finding. A competitive procurement in which an alternative could genuinely win does two things. It reveals whether credible alternatives exist for an organisation’s needs, and it gives the incumbent a reason to offer better terms. Thirty–two of the thirty–seven councils in the analysis had never run one. For private businesses, the equivalent is simpler — obtaining a serious, costed alternative quote — but the principle is the same.

Thirty–two of thirty–seven

The Computer Weekly analysis is the figure that turns one council’s renewal into a pattern.

Taken together with Warwickshire’s experience, the figure suggests a self–reinforcing cycle. Organisations that never test the market never build the knowledge, relationships or migration plans needed to switch. When a renewal arrives with a price increase, they have no alternative ready, so they renew. That renewal then becomes the baseline for the next one. Rob Howard’s prediction — “It is going to be more next time round” — is a fair description of what happens if nothing changes in between.

There are good reasons why many organisations, public and private, standardise on Microsoft 365. It is capable, widely understood, and integrates well with much else they use. The concern raised by the CMA, and illustrated here, is not that organisations choose Microsoft, but that many cannot realistically choose anything else when renewal comes, because they have never put themselves in a position to do so. That reduces the incentive for any vendor to price competitively at renewal.

For private businesses, the numbers are smaller but the structure is identical. A twenty–person firm whose email, files, Teams and sign–in all run on Microsoft 365 is just as unlikely to move in the three months before a renewal as a county council. The difference is that a small business can build a credible alternative much faster — if it starts early enough.

Where UK organisations are exposed

The rows below reflect where renewal and lock–in risk typically sits for a UK organisation heavily dependent on a single productivity platform, with badges indicating how much attention each usually needs.

The fifth and sixth rows reflect details from Warwickshire’s case. Around 900 licences are being charged to business areas, with optional add–ons potentially pushing the cost higher, and licence numbers still to be resolved because of reorganisation. Many organisations pay for licences nobody is using, for higher tiers than their staff need, or for add–ons that were trialled and never removed. Matching licences to actual use is the quickest saving available at any renewal, and it requires no change of platform.

The fourth row matters for leverage as much as for resilience. An organisation that holds its own independent copy of its email and files is in a stronger position in two ways: it is protected against accidental loss and outages, and it has already done part of the work needed to move if it ever wanted to. Data that exists only inside one platform is data that ties you to it.

What building a real choice costs

The bands below are indicative planning figures for the professional time involved — not quotes, and not a recommendation to leave Microsoft 365. Licence costs are separate.

The second row is where most of the value lies for a growing business. Starting a year or more before renewal, a modest piece of work — understanding dependencies, rehearsing a data export, getting a serious alternative quote — changes the renewal from something that happens to you into something you decide. Most businesses that do it will still renew with Microsoft, often on better terms. The point is that they could have done otherwise.

Two ways to approach a renewal

The deciding factor between those columns is time. Everything on the right can be done by an organisation of almost any size, but most of it takes months. Warwickshire’s former leader acknowledged exactly this: the council agreed with the criticism of its position but had left itself no time to change it before May 2027. The most useful lesson from the case is to start the preparation for the next renewal at the moment the current one is signed.

What this means beyond local government

It would be easy to read Warwickshire’s renewal as a public–sector story about budgets and politics. The underlying mechanics apply to any organisation. A private business that has built its operations on Microsoft 365 over several years faces the same question at every renewal: could we realistically do anything else? If the answer is no, the renewal price is largely whatever the vendor offers.

The CMA’s investigation is relevant to everyone in that position. The regulator’s provisional finding is that customers face real difficulty switching away from Microsoft or combining it with other providers, and its roadmap includes areas such as licensing and bundling. A decision is due by February 2027. Even if Microsoft is designated, any changes would follow further investigation, so they are unlikely to affect renewals in the short term. Organisations should plan on the basis of today’s terms while watching for changes that could improve their options later.

There is also a resilience argument that does not depend on price at all. An organisation that depends entirely on a single platform for email, documents, collaboration and sign–in is exposed to that platform’s outages, policy changes and commercial decisions. The steps that create leverage at renewal — knowing your dependencies, keeping an independent copy of your data, understanding what moving would involve — also make the organisation more resilient day to day. That is a reason to do them even if you are entirely happy with the platform.

For a virtual CIO conversation, this is a classic long–horizon decision. It has no immediate deadline until suddenly it does, and by then the options have narrowed. Owning the renewal decision well in advance, and reviewing it as part of regular technology planning, is how organisations avoid being in Warwickshire’s position.

The story at a glance

This story connects to several we have covered recently. The CMA’s proposed designation of Microsoft is the regulatory backdrop, focused on exactly the switching barriers Warwickshire describes. Tesco’s move away from VMware shows the same renewal dynamic with a different vendor — and an organisation that chose to leave. Microsoft’s OneDrive storage changes are another example of a vendor changing what customers get at renewal. The reporting on UK police data held on Microsoft Azure examined public–sector dependence on Microsoft from a different angle. And the Met Police shadow IT reprimand is a reminder that governance of technology choices matters as much in the public sector as anywhere.

Frequently asked questions

Cloudswitched

London-based managed IT services provider offering support, cloud solutions and cybersecurity for SMEs.