We have 40K+ Teams in our environment and would really like to leverage the inactive teams management solution from sharegate once the 10K restriction is lifted.

We have approximately 18k M365 groups and 8k Teams. Would be awesome to be able to use the ShareGate Teams management functions.

Global company with over 50,000 M365 groups. I was excited about the possibility of using this tool to manage our Teams/groups. Hopefully we will see something soon on this.

I am part of a Global Company with 75K employees and 25K+ M365 Groups/18K Teams. Also a Multi-Geo tenant of 5 current Geos. I do expect the Groups to continue to grow but want to be able to manage the shadow growth duplication and if could do it by Geo that would be great.

We just reached higher than 10k. Support for 20k groups would be enough for us for a while. But then, maybe not forever!

Recently procured this tool but disappointed at the time of activating ShareGate Apricot. We have more than 25K MS O365 Groups and this limitation has now stopped us from using ShareGate Apricot and meeting our goals and the purpose we procured this tool. Please get this rectified on very high priority.

For us, 1 additional K would be sufficient at this moment... Of course, the longer it takes before the increase is there, the more groups will appear in our tenant...

We have more than 25000 Microsoft 365 group. This limitation is basically now stopping us now from using ShareGate Apricot. I guess was little over excited when performing a test in our lower environment where we have less M365 group. Hopefully we will get something soon on this.

We are from a government department with 20k+ Groups we would also like the limit to be increased so we can take advantage of the services provided by ShareGate Apricot.

9K Teams/ 115K groups we must have a higher limit. The idea of governance in the first place is to have some control and maybe cleanup so if we can't even work to get our groups under 10K due to the limitation it limits the product to only small to medium size companies. I think it is the larger companies that need the most help over out of the box MS capability and why we turn to 3rd party to help. Note: with new MS capabilities and the use of Teams increasing overall you must understand that usage will grow not shrink and another reason to raise to at least 20K or maybe 30K from where it is now. Also we can use it currently with 15K fine so concerned when I first heard this limitation. I assume at some point, some morning I won't be able to login in ?

20K

65K

We are an education institution, so have two domains in our tenancy - Staff and Students. We have circa 35,000 Teams. I was so excited when I realised ShareGate Apricot came with our subscription. Disappointed to learn of a confusing limitation to the product. Surely the organisations who need the most assistance with governance/administration over their tenancy are those with a very large and unmanageable number of Teams. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE look at how this can be rectified.

20K

we currently have two tenants
Tenant 1 : 7550 teams, 12300 unified groups
Tenant 2: 5000 teams, 9900 unified groups
We are migrating tenant 1 into tenant two, so we will eventually have a single tenant with a combined number

We currently have 32K Groups, (when I posted originally Nov 2020 we had 29K).
Thanks for considering this CR

Hi ! I add a big +1 on this feature. We have currently around 70k groups.

We really need to leverage Apricot, but we have over 10k groups. As others have stated this would be something that we could get great value from, even if there were additional costs.

We have 35K groups on our tenant and want to manage those using SG Apricot, but due to this limit of 10K we are not able to avail the benefit of this tool. Please increase the limit of this ASAP and inform.

Please expedite to explore to liberate this limitation with options. I'm concerned management to see this as a limiting factor for next renewal of continuation of Apricot subscription after 1 year we're currently procuring purchase.

Regards,