Decision / Structure
Partnering versus holding your own permissions
Do we rent the permission or own it?
Both routes reach the market. They do not produce the same institution. Partnering moves consequence into a dependency; holding permissions moves it onto the balance sheet and the operating model.
The decision is usually framed as speed versus control. Simulation reframes it as two different regulatory positions with different failure modes.
Regulatory delta
What this decision tends to move
The delta is the difference between the institution's position today and its position if this decision were executed.
- Dependencies
- What the position relies on someone else to maintain.
- Permissions
- What the institution itself must hold.
- Oversight
- What each party must be able to evidence.
- Economics
- What the structure costs to sustain.
- Exit
- What happens if the arrangement ends.
Design space
Ways to reach the same commercial objective
Two configurations that achieve the same outcome frequently produce materially different regulatory deltas. Comparing them is how the decision is made.
Option 01
Operate through a licensed partner
Speed, concentrated dependency.
Option 02
Hold permissions directly
Control, higher build.
Option 03
Partner now, migrate later
Two transitions to plan for.
Before committing
What management should establish first
- What the partner route depends on remaining true
- What a migration would require
- Which route the commercial plan actually needs
Common questions
Questions this page answers
Is partnering a temporary solution?
Sometimes, but treating it as temporary without simulating the migration is where institutions get stuck.
Related decisions