I had already been in contact with the AM before my first post here. Things started out with me asking for a multi-year renewal quote. I supplied an inventory and then a Zoom meeting was scheduled to discuss the quote.
It wasn't the AM that brought up the MX100 EOST. It was someone from my team. I stupidly responded "I'm sure Meraki handles this situation reasonably. The excess is probably transferable. But, let's bring this up in the meeting to confirm."
The meeting started with the AM producing a quote that would take the MX100 over a year past EOST, but no mention of EOST. Then we asked about EOST and the AM didn't have an answer for us. He tried to contact his SE, but the SE didn't respond. He followed up later via email stating that we would just lose the balance of the license. That's when I posted here because that policy seemed ludicrous.
The AM did eventually find a solution to our satisfaction. But I am sad and puzzled that Cisco Meraki's position on this is to screw the customer. I'm not suggesting that if someone has 8 months left on an MX100 that they should allow a customer to transfer 8 months to an MX250. But a weighted transfer based on list price difference would be fair and reasonable. They already have those weights calculated for co-term licensing. It's puzzling that they won't do the same thing for per-device licensing.
If my team member had not brought this up, we wouldn't have asked, the AM wouldn't have brought it up, and there would have been a very bitter conversation in 2026 or 2027 when we would find that we were sold a license not worth what we thought it was. I avoided that. But I bet there will be a lot of unnecessary drama from customers that don't.