PPA Licensing Model Excessive? We are looking at PPA (Parallels Plesk Automation) to manage our hosting environment. While the product appears to still be in its infancy in terms of functionality, will Parallels be changing its rather expensive licensing model? While the PPA licence seems unnecessary (with exception for Parallels to be able to monitor PPA instances) the addition of a "Dedicated Unlimited Domain License" across various nodes seems excessive. A Dedicated Plesk Panel license should give access to "All features of Plesk Panel except those explicitly listed in the add-ons sections". In PPA, from what we understand, is far from correct. An Apache node with an Unlimited Licence will not have the functionality of a mail server. For this we are required to purchase and apply another licence, again an Unlimited licence that "has all features of Plesk Panel", which it does not as it is only a mail node. On top of this, if I am correct, we are required to purchase another Unlimited Licence for the management node, again this licence giving "all features of Plesk Panel", which in this case it does, but only serving from the management node. If we were to follow PPA best practices, it is recommended for security that no web hosting from the Management server node take place, now making to this fully featured licence essentially worthless. To align with best practices as cheaply as possible and to actually get "as close as possible to full Plesk functionality" would require three servers, a Management Node, an Apache Node and a mail node. SQL and DNS services can be served from any three. $117USD per month just for licensing costs seems excessive to be able to automate a functional, best practice aligned Plesk Panel environment that still does not have all of the admin functionality of a dedicated single Panel solution and for a product that seems to be more in its Beta stages. This licence model virtually eliminates new small businesses from implementing this product in a cost effective manner in such a competitive market while attempting to make a profit. Assuming a new hosting business is using a VPS or hosted server from a 3rd party provider. While server costs and specs vary greatly, for discussion sake we will take an average and only focus on disk space. A 30GB VPS, 1GB ram costs $30USD. To implement the above PPA best practice aligned solution requires 3 servers at $30 each. These 3 servers require 3 Dedicated Plesk Licence at $39 each. Your new hosting business is now costing you $207 per month. A very basic hosting plan offering of 1GB Disk say at $10 per month, without over selling the server disk space would give you 30 accounts. After VPS and Parallels licensing costs gives you $97 profit. If you wanted to offer Plesk Antivirus & Spam protection would cost $29.99 and $15.99 respectively. Lowering your total profit to ~$51. You could change the hosting plan to 500MB for $10 which is far from competitive, get 60 clients and receive $397-351 per month for your effort. Not enough to retire on and 60 clients all using a CMS on a 1GB ram could be an issue. It is not until you increase disk space and RAM that this solution becomes profitable but if you use servers from 3rd parties data centres, disk space and RAM especially do not always come cheaply. For some of our clients this is certainly the case. I would like to encourage a discussion from other companies on how they view this licensing model, costs using PPA as a hosting solution, your view on repetitive licensing and in the case of PPA just to enable the use of open source software and how viable this solution is in such a competitive market from all points of view, small to medium business especially.