In this article 5 sections
Why differentiation in the MSP market has failed
Oli Ridley and Mit Patel start from one point: most MSPs look the same to a business choosing one. Same website structure, same service list, same line about taking security seriously. When everything sounds the same, that business falls back on the one thing that is easy to compare. Price.
Mit draws on more than 20 years building, scaling and exiting an MSP to explain why this hurts the good operators most, and what actually changes it.
How SMEs really choose, and why it goes wrong
Mit says a typical SME gets four quotes. Two at one level, one higher, one higher again. With no way to judge what is behind the numbers, the cheapest credible option wins. The MSP cutting corners is often not doing it maliciously. They simply are not putting the time, governance and effort in to deliver a better outcome, and the SME cannot see that from the outside.
So the SME chooses on the wrong signals, the weaker MSP wins the work, and the stronger one loses a deal it deserved. Repeated across a market, that lowers the service SMEs get.
Winning on value instead of price
The way out is proof. You show how you run security and point to the evidence, so the prospect has more than price to compare. You can explain why you cost more in terms of maturity, and they have something concrete to weigh against the cheap quote.
That only works if the proof is independent. A claim the MSP makes about itself is still a claim. Verified, dated evidence from a third party is what moves a prospect off price. Down to the last two for a 70-user deal, Sereno walked the prospect through its live results and won against a rival holding ISO 27001 and SOC 2. Not the cheapest quote.
Mit says the weaker MSP is rarely cutting corners on purpose. They are under-resourced, under-priced and operationally immature, so they cannot deliver the outcome the SME assumed it was paying for. The SME only discovers the difference when something breaks, long after the decision was made. Proof lets the SME see the difference before choosing.
What Assurix changes
Assurix is the live trustmark for MSPs. Assurix independently assesses 59 controls across 2 pillars, and both must pass. An Assurix assessor signs off, live-measured controls are checked every six hours and the rest on a set cycle, and it is publicly suspended if a failed control is not fixed within 30 days. Its 40 security controls are aligned to the NCSC Cyber Assessment Framework 4.0, with 19 operational controls built for MSPs alongside them and evidence pulled live from the MSP’s existing PSA, RMM and security tools. A prospect can see what is checked without asking, and the MSP’s current status shows on the Trustmark Directory.
For an SME choosing an MSP, it is a signal it can actually trust. For a good MSP, it is the difference that survives a procurement process.
Common questions
Why do all MSPs sound the same to SMEs?
Same websites, same service lists, same line about taking security seriously. With nothing concrete to compare, SMEs fall back on price, which favours the cheapest credible quote rather than the best-run provider.
How can an MSP win on value instead of price?
By showing how it runs security and operations rather than asserting it. Verified, dated evidence from a third party gives a prospect something real to weigh against a cheap quote.
Why does independent verification matter?
A claim an MSP makes about itself is still a claim. Independent verification is what actually moves a prospect off price.
Who is Assurix for?
Growing UK and Ireland MSPs that want to win work beyond referrals without being undercut by MSPs cutting corners.
What is the Assurix Trustmark?
The live trustmark for MSPs. Assurix independently assesses 59 controls: 40 security controls aligned to NCSC CAF 4.0 and 19 operational controls built for MSPs. Live-measured controls are checked every six hours and the rest on a set cycle. An Assurix assessor signs off. A failure left unfixed for 30 days suspends the Trustmark publicly.
