Updates to managed assets.

My first thought it was a 1st April joke but the article was updated the 2nd of april. 

I have read this will go live on renewal and it’s live for new trials. 
The cost as of now are  €110/month per 500 extra assets. 

Yeah this has us pretty stressed and frustrated. It will more than triple our annual subscription, which is not viable. We’ve been happy with Freshservice for nearly 10 years but this will force us to look elsewhere. 

I’ve been searching but I have not come across this, could you share where you saw this posted?

​I understand your concerns regarding Freshservice's recent updates to managed assets coverage. The expanded definition now includes assets discovered through various methods like Probe and Agent, third-party sources (e.g., Intune, Jamf, Automox), and manual uploads via APIs, UI, CSV files, or custom integrations . These changes aim to provide comprehensive monitoring of your entire IT asset inventory. Freshservice's account management teams are gradually implementing these updates for existing customers. For specific details on pricing and implementation timelines, I recommend reaching out directly to your account manager or contacting Freshservice's customer support. This will ensure you receive information tailored to your organization's Auslandei.com.​

I'm deeply disappointed with this abrupt change, especially given the impact on customers manually managing assets through CSV. The associated cost, $1500 annually for a 500-asset pack, is exorbitant and comparable to 2.5 agent licenses. This has seriously jeopardized my plans to scale Freshservice in our company.

To be honest, this is outrageous. We recently switched to Freshservice, and the possibility to add free “virtual asset objects” which are not considered hardware was the key feature why we went for this product in the first place.

We are a company with very complex processes, and need to provide a lot of service requests to our endusers, which relate to objects like “Sharepoint Site Colletions”, “Teams” or “Outlook Shared Mailbox” - you get the gist. To make these virtual objects available in Service requests, we have to store them as assets (Custom Objects are not an option). I am happy with the current price model, basically paying for any kind of hardware asset or virtual machine. But having to pay for these virtual objects prohibits us to implement more Service Requests. 

This is comparable of charging us per ticket in a ticket system: It encourages the customer to NOT use the ITSM system. How about increasing the price per agent, or charge extra for the hardware assets, but keep the virtual asset types (e.g. services, “other”, etc) free of charge as before! This is a huge road block, and we are strongly considering moving to a different ITSM product

Trade off would be to only charge for Hardware asset types. 

Hi,

This change in the way of managing assets is 'shooting youself in the foot' by Freshworks. Many customers will leave the platform for others where they don't have these extra costs, as well as the new business that will be lost by ceasing to be competitive. I hope Freshworks reconsiders and returns the asset system to how it was before.

When we purchased FreshService 2 years ago the asset management was a key reason we chose it.  We have spent literally hundreds of hours building out syncs and workflows and had things almost perfect.  If they proceed with this ridiculous change our cost would more than triple, and will be unaffordable for our budget and we’ll need to move to another product.  Anyone have any suggestions?

Yup same here, work in the nonprofit sector, especially at a time like this, seeing our bill quadruple is quite upsetting. Honestly, I have not had any major issues or complaints with Freshservice until this. This feels abrupt and forced. I don’t want to transition to another product, it’s been affordable with reasonalbe increases and for the functionality I get out of it, I’m okay with spending money. But to have our bill over tripled for manually loaded assets by hand not even CSV, just Onces we have loaded in there. I’m not following the logic at all. 

This change is outrageous and a pure money grabbing exercise. We are a public school, a customer since 2014. All our IT assets managed in FreshService, where we are looking down the barrel of $24,000 p/a on top of our existing subscription fees which are already very significant. It simply isn’t sustainable, and we also will be forced to move to another provider. I understand charging for new features but changing the asset definition to charge customers more for an existing feature is totally unacceptable. Whoever my account manager is will not be getting any positive feedback from me. FreshService executive team needs to examine if they truly value their customers by walking back on this change and find other more reasonable ways to increase profits.

222222

The broader scope of asset discovery capabilities and updates to our pricing model are applicable to new customers from 03 April, 2025. These updates ensure comprehensive monitoring and management of your entire IT asset inventory.

Note: These changes would be gradually rolled-out to existing Freshservice customers by the account management teams. 

Updates to Managed Assets Pricing Model : Freshservice
I’m sure I read it was from renewal but I could mixed this with something ells. 

The information we have received is that for accounts with annual renewal, the new prices will be applied at the next renewal. For monthly accounts we have no further information as to when the new prices will be applied.

Thanks that is the info I have heard but no written confirmation. 

As an aside to the whole Asset limit Fiasco, I would love to know how tracking those digital assets is working out for you in general. This is something we’ve been trying to tackle, given the asset limitation, we may have to switch platforms. We were already considering it anyways as a means to consolidate software down.  

They have to walk this back, surely?! I can’t imagine how damaging this change will be to their business.