Move to PowerMTA,
without losing reputation.

Not when it's done right. Reputation lives on your sending IPs and domains, not on the PowerMTA software, so we re-point the new install to your existing warm IPs and stage the cutover rather than cold-starting. The whole plan is built around preserving the reputation you've earned.

Yes. We review your current config for 6.0 compatibility, flag anything that changed between versions, build and dry-run the upgraded configuration, then cut over with verification. It's the safest way to move to 6.0 without surprises in production.

Yes, when the volume justifies it, and we'll tell you honestly if it doesn't. We translate your routing and authentication into a clean PowerMTA config and preserve reputation through the cutover. If you're still deciding whether to move at all, the PowerMTA vs Postfix comparison is a good starting point.

We plan for zero or near-zero. Depending on your setup we run the new environment in parallel or cut over in stages, so mail keeps flowing while we verify the target. The exact approach is scoped during the assessment.

You bring a valid PowerMTA license from Bird or an authorized reseller. This is a migration and configuration service; we never resell, bundle or crack the software, and we only work with legitimate, opt-in sending.

The hands-on build is usually a few days, but a reputation-safe migration is paced by warm-up and parallel running, not by how fast we can configure. A typical move runs the new environment alongside the old for two to four weeks while volume shifts across gradually. We scope the exact timeline in the assessment, because it depends on your volume, how many IPs are involved and whether any are starting cold.

For a window, yes, and it's money well spent. Running the old provider in parallel for two to four weeks is what lets mail keep flowing while the new environment proves itself and volume ramps — it's the safety net that makes a zero-downtime cutover possible. The overlap is temporary and far cheaper than the alternative of a hard switch that goes wrong.

The suppression list, yes — the people who unsubscribed or complained must stay suppressed on the new platform, or you risk mailing them again and tanking your reputation on day one. What you should not carry over is the dead weight: hard-bounced and long-inactive addresses. Migrating those to a fresh setup is a fast way to look like a spammer to providers watching a new sending identity. We sort that out as part of the plan.

Yes — collapsing several aging or underused sending servers into one well-pooled PowerMTA is a common reason to migrate. The work is mapping each existing stream and its warm IPs onto a clean pool structure so nothing loses reputation in the move and the streams stay properly separated. It usually simplifies operations and cost at the same time.

Yes — the connection between PowerMTA and your campaign front-end is part of the move, so MailWizz, Interspire or another platform is re-wired to the new environment and tested as part of the cutover. The aim is that on the day you switch off the old path, your existing sending workflow keeps working unchanged from your side.

We’ll tell you. Sometimes the honest answer is that a clean fresh install is simpler than translating a tangled old config, or that your volume doesn’t yet justify self-hosting at all. The assessment exists to find the right path, not to push a migration — and we’d rather point you to a fresh setup or talk you out of moving than sell you the wrong engagement.

Yes, and it’s a common reason people call. The pre-migration audit reads the existing setup directly rather than relying on documentation that doesn’t exist, so an inherited or undocumented config is reverse-engineered into a clean, understood one as part of the move. You come out the far side with a configuration your team can actually read, which is often worth as much as the migration itself.

If anything it should improve, because the new config is tuned and hardened rather than carrying years of accumulated cruft — but raw throughput is rarely the constraint anyway. What limits real-world sending is what receivers will accept from your IPs, which is a reputation-and-throttling question, not a hardware one. The migration preserves that reputation and sets sane per-provider rates, so you send as fast as the inbox will cleanly take.

Usually for cost and control. Hosted bills climb steeply at volume, shared IP pools mean your reputation rides on other senders’ behaviour, and even SES — cheap per email — leaves reputation management entirely on you while being the most work to operate. Self-hosted PowerMTA gives you dedicated IPs, full control of routing and reputation, and a fixed cost base. We translate your sending into a clean PowerMTA config and move you across without restarting the reputation you built there.