What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco SD-WAN?

The product pricing is high. Fortinet is cheaper than Cisco. I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

The product is expensive.

The tool is very expensive. It has a five-year subscription.

The product is not too expensive. It is competitive considering security features. The licensing cost is typically based on bandwidth subscription. For example, you must purchase a corresponding subscription if you have a bandwidth range of one to five Mbps. While this may seem insignificant for smaller bandwidth needs, it can add up for organizations with multiple links. It's worth noting that some other vendors, like Huawei and Fortinet, don't charge for bandwidth subscriptions in their SD-WAN solutions.

The initial cost is quite significant, but the investment is worthwhile.

The pricing is neutral. However, there is room for improvement in the licensing model.

The product's license is expensive.

The price of Cisco SD-WAN is expensive. We pay approximately $50 monthly for the use of the solution. I rate the price of Cisco SD-WAN a two out of ten.

The price is based on the types of routers being used as well as the product licenses.

Hmmm. From an MPLS perspective, I believe SD-WAN is less expensive. However, the cost of licensing renewal to get some features it brings make is high compared to other products in the industry performing the same function.

The solution is quite expensive so it is important to enhance its cost efficiency.

We have a subscription and a three-year license.

The cost is reasonable. I would rate the price as seven out of ten.

Cost-wise, Cisco SD-WAN is comparatively high.

The pricing is quite high. There are other vendors that provide relatively low prices as compared to Cisco. The cost depends on the number of devices and the application the customer is using. It is not a fixed price. It depends on the bundle. It varies on what application you wanted to use.

The price varies. They have different products, including routers, some of which are now being removed or deprecated. The new platforms with the CSR 8,000 series have competitive pricing, and the kind of features they're providing justifies the cost - especially when you look at the number of features and support that comes with it. I'd rate the pricing at a four out of five in terms of its competitiveness.

The licensing cost is slightly on the higher side, but some of the customers are large, so they are willing to pay for it. On a scale of one to five, I would rate Cisco's pricing as a three.

The solution is costly compared to Aruba. You also have to pay if you want to implement extra features like a VPN.

For 600 links, the license for Cisco SD-WAN costs us US$250k a year. In Pakistan, we have the option to get this solution at a more discounted price.

It's one of the more expensive solutions out there. I would rate it two out of five in terms of affordability. All you need to pay is the licensing fee. There are no extra costs.

It's costly. The cost is high compared to competitors. There are many different licenses and devices. There's the license and the device itself as hardware, and the license as software. It varies between the hardware and software, and they have many free licensing models. So, there isn't an exact price. There are also many discounts in the middle before they provide it to the customer.

There is a monthly subscription to use this solution.

Cisco SD-WAN is more expensive than its competitors.

This is not a cheap option but if you move from Capex to Opex, I expect you should have lower costs. I am talking specifically about Managed Services License Agreement (MSLA) model.

The pricing is fair, and it's on par with the market vendors. But based on the competition, Cisco could work on the pricing, go deep on discounts and provide more commercially viable solutions to customers.

It is not the cheapest solution on the market, however, without a doubt, it is one of the options that best handles complex topologies. Therefore there is a need to know more accurately what the client wants to do, what their applications are, what their flows are, and, after this consultation, define the best architecture and then choose the best manufacturer that obviously offers me a cost efficient option.

I can't speak to the costs associated with the product. We get involved with just the installations, that's all.

The price of the solution is the only negative factor, it is much more expensive compared with the Cisco Meraki SD-WAN solution.

In the Russian market where we operate, this solution is expensive.

Being embedded with Cisco is a matter of negotiation. Therefore, the pricing depends on the negotiation and if the client is a medium-sized company or a large company. It depends on the geography. We already see different pricing when we deploy in India when we deploy New Zealand or we deploy in the Nordics, in Europe, or even in Southern Europe. Prices are always different and depend on the local offices and how big the deal is. Pricing varies according to requirements, accessory services, and pure hardware. Markets are so hyper-competitive, and pricing is converging for all top providers. If you go to Fortinet, if you go to Palo Alto, it's not that you'll find prices that are so dramatically different. Everyone is completely aligned to compete. Differentiation is not on pricing. When you deploy a system like Cisco, the main selection criteria, is not pricing. Today, even rich companies are very careful on pricing, however, companies are very mature in terms of structuring deals. The price of a system is very well-known in the market. All the differences are made by two essential elements. One is the ability of your sales team to penetrate within a company. Sales channels are making all the difference - not technology, not anything else. The second point is innovation and quality of accessory services delivered on top of the hardware. Hardware today is a given, is like code for a nice screen. Cisco is able to provide some hardware functions and firmware functions, however, all the difference is made by ancillary services, by additional service, by all the service that you build on the top of your products, and adding a very good success manager that is handling the deployment process and can guarantee that the client is extracting true business value from IT investments. People don't spend money to buy hardware, to buy networks. People spend money to execute their corporate functions in a very effective, efficient way, in a very secure way. They don't care about Cisco. They don't care about the firewall or the router. They need to deliver products and successful expediencies and services across the globe.

It's expensive. If you compare Cisco with Fortinet and Juniper, you'll find that Cisco is more expensive than other vendors.

The pricing is quite high. Cisco is not cheap.

The solution is a bit expensive. There's a big jump from WAN to SD-WAN which customers don't like.

Cisco's pricing is not entirely satisfactory when you compare the SD-WAN solutions in Asian markets — like the South Asian market in Sri Lanka — because there are several competing brands including Fortinet and Citrix, who provide much the same product for a generally lower price. And when it comes to firewall vendors like Palo Alto and SonicWall, they're also selling here. It's the same with VMware, too; they have much the same features. So when you do a comparative showdown among these giants, you can see that Cisco and their customers could benefit from adjustments in terms of pricing. Fortinet, for one, is much cheaper than Cisco currently.

The pricing of this solution is very expensive.

It is expensive. The license limitation is there in terms of bandwidth. Basically, Cisco is always good in terms of performance and related things. However, if you want to have a license, for example, for 100 Mbps, they charge you because of their 100 Mbps. If you want to go without the license of 300 Mbps, it is a bandwidth license as well. This is not happening with other vendors. That is the reason why we moved away from Cisco. The bill gets a little bit high. I do remember that one time we were trying to increase the bandwidth for at least five devices, and the license got as high as 20-grand for five devices, only for the license. It was expensive for us at the time. Our company is not a big company, but it is a solid company. The price was very high, and we moved away from Cisco because of the price.

The license model is too complex with too many flavors and options. You might not be able to see it from an end user's point of view, but from a telco point of view, their license model is too complex. They should have a flexible license model. If you want to have good pricing, you need to buy it for a two-year, four-year, or five-year license immediately. Some other vendors have much more flexible license models.

It is going to be on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs.

Our clients have made decisions related to pricing, but we are not involved at this stage.

The costs are a bit on the high side.

It is much cheaper than other solutions. Most of our clients are the top 500 companies, and they all have a corporate contract.

Depending upon the speed and depending upon the vendor, if you are getting SD-WAN as a service, it is probably something in the neighborhood of $100 to $200 a month per location. That is the cost of the SD-WAN. Then, of course, you need your business broadband connections. Business broadband with like 50 megs symmetrical or 100 megs symmetrical and may cost something like $100 a month or so. But at any rate, the services are not very expensive and they are widely available.

Cisco is more expensive than some competing products.

We pay for the Cisco Customer Care support, which is a couple of hundred dollars. There are no fees in addition to this.

I don't know much about the pricing because, at present, we used some simulators to test the software for clients. The pricing does not always match up with what our lab predictions are. We give information to the customers, and we give them some knowledge about the products and we explain the differences between the different vendors, like Juniper, and other vendors small vendors like Altera Technology. Ultimately, the client decides which vendor they will go with.

The pricing of the solution is okay. Previously we used Cisco Prime and found we were wasting a lot. This is much better for us and our clients. However, it's still expensive.

Typically, we work to offer our customer autonomy, however, we do offer maintenance packages. Typically, we'll sell co-management packages to clients whereby they choose the priority of the application on the network and we will manage all of what is programmed on the customer's behalf.

The solution is subscription-based. It is quite pricy, as compared to its competitors, for example, Fortinet. You can see the pricing on the Cisco site, and my understanding is that it's the same pricing across Europe. There are extra costs involved, however, because if you have an on-premises model, you have to buy the equipment. There are also costs associated with technical support.

The solution is not cheap. Most customers are now moving from an APEX spending model to an OPEX spending model. The licenses are pretty expensive. There are additional support costs which is not inexpensive. Licensing, support, product, technology, and everything in the Cisco SD-WAN solution costs. I think it's the most expensive solution on the market.

Setup cost is reasonably standard as it gives a complete WAN link utilization with perfomance of QoS