IFS is suitable for medium-sized companies or large enterprises. It is probably too expensive for small companies.

Pricing is relatively negotiable with companies like IFS. There is a fixed idea of what a license price would be however, if you have a significant amount of users, you might be able to negotiate it down. I would approximate the general cost to be somewhere around 1,000 to 1,200 pounds per user annually.

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten in terms of affordability. I think the price is fair and reasonable based on what you get. 

There can also be additional fees too - there may be charges for maintenance, security, and support. None of these charges are hidden though and would all be very clear at the point of making a decision as to whether to use IFS or not.

There are varying license levels that you can purchase. I don't know that we've taken advantage of the license levels for regular users. They offer various packages. If a license isn't really needed, there are ways of working around it.

There's a dedicated license for people who just punch in and out and don't need to access IFS. It's a good implementation that has a return on investment, so those license fees are well worth it.

I won't be able to comment on the pricing since I wasn't looking after the pricing-related details of the solution.

Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money.

IFS Applications are competitive in terms of pricing compared to other vendors, such as SAP, Oracle, and Epicor. They are generally cheaper, especially for licensing costs.

I rate the price of IFS Applications a six out of ten.

IFS is much cheaper than MS Dynamics or SAP solution, and it's more flexible so it is a very good choice for companies that don't want to be limited to making changes or only using a vendor company (causing very expensive changes). Licenses are also cheaper.

We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive.

The additional cost that comes with the solution includes the overhead of the people who are trying to fix the tool issues. These people are trying to reproduce the issue and report it to the technical support and testing with them which is huge. It is the cost of quality in the end.

Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models. Don't underestimate the focus on content. A system on its own is as good as the data it can leverage like content, categories, and knowledge.

The pricing of the solution may appear to be expensive for smaller companies with only tens of users; however, for larger and mid-size industrial companies, IFS is able to win deals and the pricing is competitive in the market. 
I've seen a lot of different licensing models, and IFS pricing might be one where we are required to buy a license for each feature module. This could be a problem for small businesses that require all the standard features such as finance, HR, and procurement; having to buy a license for each of these would make the total cost of ownership expensive.

There's an additional yearly cost for support.

IFS is competitively priced. I've been in several selection processes where the company has narrowed it down to three or four ERPs. You go through a process where everybody has input. In all the evaluations I've been involved in, IFS has always come up as number one or two.

That's considering feedback from various departments like finance. Can we use it? Is it going to do what we want for, say, manufacturing? IFS has always been a top choice, and part of that is cost.

IFS Cloud Platform is not a cheap solution, and it is an extremely functional one. I consider it to be a well-priced solution compared to other mid-range or high-end ERP solutions. From a price perspective, yeah, I think it's a pretty fairly priced product, but it's difficult to comment on the price too much because I haven't had too much exposure to the exact project costs of the product. With IFS Cloud Platform, it's quite difficult to set a benchmark against the products.

There are different ways to work with vendors depending on budget. We elected to use our UK location as the pilot site. We also decided to start small (ie with the base functionality) and grow into the system as the implementation rolled out. We paid for consultancy to workshop our main functions via video link in conjunction with all of our sites - a big task considering time zones.

The IFS functional consultants, armed with the information they needed, configured the system to meet our needs and we went live in the time allotted by the project plan. Once the UK was up and running, we rolled out to our other sites in sequence. We did not have enough resource to go big bang.

Doing things this way meant that our IT team learned the system pretty much inside out. They are able to deal with all but the most complex coding problems. It also saved us a huge amount of consultancy cost. The licensing is competitive and we have expanded the number of users over time as more people have wanted access to the system. Excluding the expanded user base, we managed to keep to about 10% above the original budget. There was some creep as the advantages of the system were realized by a wider audience and the culture of the business changed.

IFS Applications is expensive software, but it's on par with SAP and Oracle. It's for large enterprises and government entities and not for small and medium-sized enterprises. They have one licensing model, but if you want to have a module-specific license, they provide component-based licenses. Unlike SAP and Oracle, it doesn't have different levels of licensing. It's one level of licensing.

Assyst license has two types

one for end-users

and one for Support Staff

each one of them has the option of concurrent or dedicated license

you should know that 1 concurrent license covers up to 10 to 20 users

Conduct tough negotiations regarding price and services. It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners. Not many partners have well qualified resources and are not formally trained on the latest product version.

It's not cheap compared to its competitors.

While the solution is great for large enterprises, it's expensive, so it may not be feasible for smaller organizations.

The solution works on a subscription fee. It's not a monthly basis, but more about a one-time fee and then usage according to a variety of items. It's not like a cloud-based model where you pay every month. 

This software is sold under a user-based pricing model. This includes access to all the modules of the system, which you can turn on or off for each user based on security.

If you only need a limited amount of functionally now and in the future, buying a module-based system will usually save you money. However, module-based pricing will limit the scalability of your ERP system. For many companies, user-based pricing is often a better value and a better investment – you get more for your money and room to grow.

Both the pricing and licensing need to be negotiated up front. If possible, include future expansion plans in terms of additional users and modules. The best discounts are applied at the initial purchasing stage.

Licensing is on an annual basis, with no additional costs.

It's not cheapest, and it's not mediocre pricing. 

Pricing is comparatively or sufficiently higher than maybe all other IT solutions.

There are no additional fees, and everything is included in the license.

The solution is not cheap. It's competitive, however, it's a bit higher than other options on the market. Everything is included in the license. You don't have to purchase additional features beyond that.