The VMware licensing trap for SMEs: the Essentials Kit has no successor

Is your VMware renewal coming up? WZ-IT works through the licensing position, sets alternatives against it and supports the move, see Proxmox instead of VMware. Work through it with us

Coverage of VMware pricing works with large numbers: fourfold increases, 60 per cent extra cost, percentages from analyst reports. Such figures are striking and useless for your planning, because Broadcom publishes no price list and every question of terms is negotiated through a partner.

What can be evidenced instead are the structural changes, and one of them hits small environments particularly: the product intended for three-host clusters no longer exists, and it has no successor.

This article sets out what actually changed, what of it was reversed, and how to work out your own position rather than planning with someone else's numbers. As of 31 August 2026, updated on 1 October 2026 with the European Commission questioning.

Table of contents

• What actually changed
• The Essentials Kit and its missing successor
• The 72-core episode and what to learn from it
• Why figures from blog posts do not hold here
• How to work out your own position
• The European Commission is questioning cloud providers
• When the decision falls
• What a move really costs
• When VMware remains the right choice
• How we approach this at WZ-IT
• Further guides

What actually changed

Broadcom acquired VMware in November 2023. Since then three changes are evidenced and permanent:

Existing perpetual licences keep running. What ends is continuation under the previous model at the next renewal.

The Essentials Kit and its missing successor

The vSphere Essentials Kit and Essentials Plus Kit were the answer to a particular size: three hosts, a manageable core count, and a price a mid-sized company could approve without a tender.

Both were discontinued. No direct successor for that size exists. Those affected are directed to vSphere Foundation, a bundle containing components small environments do not need and priced accordingly.

That is the actual news for mid-sized companies, and it gets lost in the discussion of percentages. The point is not that the same product became more expensive. The point is that the fitting product is no longer offered and the remaining bundles are cut for a different audience.

Anyone virtualising three hosts today buys a bundle designed for larger environments, or changes platform. There is no third option.

The 72-core episode and what to learn from it

In April 2025 Broadcom announced it would raise the minimum order from 16 to 72 cores per subscription. For a cluster with 32 cores that would have meant licensing 72 and never using 40 of them.

After protests from mid-sized companies, remote offices and public-sector data centres, the decision was reversed within the same year. A 16-core minimum applies again.

That episode matters for two reasons.

First, practically: anyone reading an analysis from 2025 finds the 72 there and plans with a figure that no longer applies. A number of comparison sites still carry it.

Second, fundamentally: the terms have changed several times within two years, in both directions. Anyone basing a platform decision on announced terms is basing it on something that may change again before the next renewal. That is the real planning risk, not the level of any single price.

Why figures from blog posts do not hold here

Concrete case figures circulate: a financial services firm whose bill quadrupled, a mid-sized company whose budget rose from 35,000 to over 200,000 euros.

Such figures are usable as an indication and not as a basis for planning, for a simple reason: Broadcom publishes no price list. Terms are negotiated through partners and depend on core count, term, bundle and negotiating position. Two companies of the same size can receive different offers.

Only a quote for your specific environment is reliable. Everything else is context.

We therefore deliberately state no euro amounts in this article. What we provide instead is the route to your own figure.

How to work out your own position

Four data points are enough to assess a quote:

1. Cores, not hosts. Add up the physical cores of all hosts being virtualised. That is the billing basis. Three hosts with two processors of 16 cores each come to 96 cores.

2. The minimum quantity. At least 16 cores are licensed per physical processor, even if the CPU has fewer cores (Broadcom Knowledge Base). With small hosts that can mean licensing more than is installed.

3. The bundle. Establish which bundle you are being offered and which of its components you will actually use. Bundles regularly contain parts that go unused in small environments but sit in the price.

4. The term. A price for one year and a price for five years are different statements. Ask for both and convert to annual cost.

With those four data points a quote can be compared against an alternative. Without them, impressions are being compared.

The European Commission is questioning cloud providers

In September 2026 Broadcom's licensing policy reached the EU competition authority. The status (October 2026):

Questioning market participants is a preliminary step. Possible next steps would be formal proceedings or interim measures; whether and when that happens is open.

For a mid-sized company this does not change its own calculation for now. Two points are still relevant:

• VMware at a hosting provider. Anyone who does not run vSphere themselves but uses it at a cloud or hosting provider is directly affected by the closure of the partner programme. Ask the provider under which conditions it will continue to offer VMware.
• No planning based on a decision from Brussels. Postponing a renewal in the expectation that the Commission will change the terms replaces planning with hope. The fixed date remains your own contract end.

When the decision falls

There is no reason for haste. Existing environments keep running, and a migration under time pressure is the most expensive way to carry one out.

The point at which a decision falls is the next contract renewal. From that follows a sensible run-up:

Anyone with that run-up negotiates differently. A quote against which a rehearsed alternative exists is assessed differently from one with no fallback.

What a move really costs

The most common mistake in the business case is setting licence costs against licence costs. That favours the move and is incomplete.

What belongs in it:

The migration itself. Transferring virtual machines is a solved problem. The effort sits in the ordering, the maintenance windows and the fallback path that has to stay open.

The backup. Backup solutions for vSphere work through interfaces that do not exist in that form under Proxmox. Proxmox Backup Server takes over the job but has to be set up and the restore rehearsed.

The monitoring. Existing checks and alerts reach into vSphere and have to be rebuilt. Which tools come into question we assessed in the monitoring comparison.

Third-party support statements. Check before deciding whether an application in use is explicitly supported only on vSphere. That is rare, but where it applies it settles the question.

Familiarisation. A team that has known vSphere for ten years needs time for a new interface and different terminology.

With all that included, the result still favours a move in most mid-sized environments, but the benefit arrives later than the pure licence calculation suggests.

When VMware remains the right choice

There are environments where a move is not the right answer:

• Applications with support statements only for vSphere, where deviating costs vendor support
• Very large installations, where negotiating room is greater and migration effort is considerable
• Environments shortly before a planned refresh anyway, where the question reappears in eighteen months
• Teams without capacity for a migration, as long as the cost is bearable

In those cases the right work is not the move but the negotiation: term, bundle scope, and the conditions for the renewal after next.

How we approach this at WZ-IT

We start with the core count and the contract date, not with a product recommendation. Together they establish how much time remains for an orderly decision.

Where a move comes into question, we build a test environment with real machines from the estate, not with examples. Only once migration, backup and restore have worked there is the alternative solid. What the move means technically we described in the comparison of Proxmox VE and VMware.

We take on ongoing operations on request, including backup, monitoring and updates within an agreed window.

Further guides

• Proxmox VE 9.2 versus VMware - the technical comparison
• Moving from VMware to Proxmox - approach and support
• Proxmox Backup Server - backup after the move
• Migrating from VMware - the technical steps
• Monitoring compared - rebuilding monitoring

When does your contract expire? We establish the core count, assess a quote and build a rehearsed alternative before a decision has to be made. Book a call

Sources

• Broadcom licensing changes and the reversal of the 72-core minimum
• What happened to the Essentials Plus Kit
• Distributor Arrow on the announced rise from 16 to 72 cores
• SDxCentral: Broadcom faces escalating EU scrutiny over VMware licensing changes (14 September 2026)
• CISPE: Broadcom Doubles Down on Harm to European Cloud (15 September 2026)
• VMware licensing 2026: overview of bundles and terms
• Broadcom Knowledge Base: Counting cores for VCF and vSphere Foundation (16-core minimum per CPU)