Start with the control question
An advertising account is not just a set of login details. It sits inside a platform’s permission system, and the person who controls the account, its parent business space, recovery methods and billing arrangements may have different levels of authority. A handover format determines which of those controls move to the buyer, which remain with the seller, and how dependent the buyer stays on the seller after access is granted.
The main formats are shared credentials, role-based access inside a seller’s business container, a platform-supported transfer of ownership or administrative control, and a managed arrangement in which the seller keeps control while the buyer uses the account. The labels can sound similar in a sales conversation, so it helps to ask what the buyer can actually do in the platform interface. “Access” alone does not establish ownership or independence.
The right choice depends on the work. A short, limited test may not require the same administrative control as a longer project with ongoing campaigns, team members and records to maintain. But convenience should be weighed against continuity: if the seller is the only person who can restore access, resolve a permission issue or manage the account’s parent business, the buyer has a continuing dependency.
Shared credentials: direct access, unclear independence
With shared credentials, the seller provides the account’s login details, and the buyer signs in as the account user. This can appear to offer direct control because the buyer can work from the account rather than waiting for the seller to grant individual permissions. In practice, a login does not by itself establish that the buyer controls every recovery route, associated email address, phone number, business container or payment arrangement.
The seller may retain visibility or influence through recovery information, linked accounts, business-level administration or other access that is not obvious from the login alone. The buyer should establish in writing which credentials and associated recovery channels are included, what remains connected to the seller, and who can change them. If the account is part of a Meta Business Portfolio, Google Ads setup or TikTok Business Center, access to the account should not be confused with control of the surrounding business space.
Recovery is the central weakness of this format. If a sign-in issue arises, the account’s recovery process may depend on contact details or identity information that the buyer does not control. A seller who retains those details may be able to assist, but that also means the buyer remains reliant on the seller. Credential sharing can also create security and platform-compliance concerns, so it should not be treated as a workaround for platform permissions or account checks.
This format may be considered for a narrowly scoped, short-term task only when the arrangement is permitted by the platform and the remaining dependencies are understood. It is generally a poor basis for a longer project that needs stable administration, clear accountability and independent recovery.
Role access: work inside the seller’s container
Role-based access gives the buyer a named permission within a business environment controlled by the seller. Depending on the platform and the role granted, the buyer may be able to create or manage campaigns, view reporting, or perform other assigned tasks without receiving the account’s primary login. Meta Business Portfolio, Google Ads manager-account arrangements and TikTok Business Center can all involve layered permissions, though the available roles and structures differ by platform.
The buyer’s real control is limited to the permissions granted. The seller or another administrator may be able to change or remove access, manage the surrounding business, or retain authority over assets that the buyer uses. The buyer should clarify which specific account and assets the role covers, whether the permission allows the intended work, and who can alter the access. A role that permits campaign work is not necessarily a role that permits user administration or ownership changes.
Visibility is shared in a different way than with shared credentials. The seller’s administrators may be able to see that the buyer has access and may have visibility into account activity or work performed, depending on the platform’s structure and permissions. The buyer, in turn, may have access to only the information needed for the assigned role. Neither party should assume that a role makes activity private from the other.
Recovery usually remains tied to the seller’s business environment. If the buyer loses access, an authorized administrator may be able to restore or adjust the role, but the buyer cannot independently recover the account merely because they once had permission. This can suit a short test or a project where the seller is intentionally providing managed access. For longer work, it may still be appropriate when the seller is meant to remain the account operator, but it is less suitable when the buyer expects independent control.
Ownership transfer: stronger separation, where supported
A platform-supported ownership or administrative transfer is intended to move control through the platform’s own permission and business-management tools, rather than by passing around a shared login. The exact mechanisms depend on the platform and account type. Some arrangements may allow a business asset or account to be assigned to a different business or administrator; others may not support the transfer the parties have in mind. The term “transfer” should therefore be defined precisely before the handover.
When a genuine transfer is available and completed, the buyer can have more independent control than under a role granted inside the seller’s container. The relevant question is not simply whether the buyer can edit campaigns, but whether the buyer’s business or administrator becomes responsible for managing the account and its access. The buyer should also identify any connected assets or services that are not included. Moving control of one account does not automatically move every related business asset, mailbox, payment method or record.
The seller’s visibility after a transfer depends on what access remains. If the seller retains an administrator role or other connection, they may continue to see or manage some aspects of the account. If access is removed, their ability to view the account may be reduced, but the parties should not assume that removal erases platform records or guarantees a particular level of privacy. The written handover should describe what access the seller will keep, if any, and why.
Recovery is generally more robust when the buyer’s own authorized administrators and contact channels are responsible for the account. Even then, recovery remains subject to the platform’s processes, and a transfer does not guarantee that every future access problem can be resolved immediately. This format is usually the clearest fit for a longer project where the buyer needs continuity and ongoing administration, provided the platform supports the intended transfer and the account type is eligible.
Managed access: the seller remains the operator
In a managed arrangement, the seller keeps ownership or primary administrative control and gives the buyer a defined way to use the account. That may involve a role in the seller’s business environment, or a service in which the seller carries out account tasks on the buyer’s behalf. The important feature is not the label but the allocation of control: the seller remains responsible for the account’s core administration.
The buyer’s control is therefore limited. They may be able to request work, review permitted information or manage certain campaign tasks, but they cannot assume that they can change administrators, move the account or continue independently if the arrangement ends. The seller is likely to retain visibility into the account’s operation, and the extent of that visibility should be made clear before work begins.
Recovery is also primarily the seller’s responsibility. That can be practical when the seller is deliberately providing ongoing account management, but it creates a dependency that should be acknowledged rather than described as ownership. The parties should document who handles access issues, what happens if the seller becomes unavailable, how records are provided, and what happens to campaigns and permissions when the arrangement concludes.
This format can fit a short test or a project where the buyer wants a defined service rather than control of the account itself. It may also suit longer work when the seller is intentionally the continuing operator and both sides accept that arrangement. It is not a substitute for a transfer when the buyer’s requirement is independent, lasting control.
Compare visibility and recovery, not just the login
A useful comparison separates four questions. Who can administer the account? Who can see its activity? Who controls the recovery channels and business container? What happens if the working relationship ends? These questions reveal more than asking whether the buyer will “get access.” A buyer may have broad campaign permissions yet no authority to change administrators, while a seller may keep access even after sharing login details.
Recovery arrangements deserve particular attention because they determine who can act when normal access is interrupted. Ask whether the relevant email address and phone number are controlled by the buyer, seller or another party; who can respond to platform requests; and whether the buyer’s own authorized administrators can manage the account. These are planning questions, not instructions to evade platform checks. Accounts should be used in line with the platform’s terms and identity or security processes.
Visibility should be described in practical terms. A seller may see the account through a business-level role even if the buyer uses a separate login. Conversely, a buyer may receive credentials but still lack visibility into the parent business or related assets. The handover agreement should state what each party can access and what remains outside the arrangement, without promising that a platform will conceal or erase activity.
Match the format to the project horizon
For a short test, role access or managed access can be proportionate if the seller is meant to retain control, the permitted work is clear, and the buyer accepts the dependency. Shared credentials may look faster, but they can leave recovery and accountability ambiguous. A short duration does not remove the need to use an arrangement allowed by the platform.
For a longer project, the priority is continuity. A platform-supported transfer, when available and appropriate for the account type, can provide a clearer foundation for independent administration. If the seller remains the operator, a documented managed arrangement may still be workable, but the buyer should not treat it as ownership. The format should match the intended relationship, not merely the convenience of the initial handover.
Before agreeing, have the seller specify the platform, account type, business container, permissions, retained access, recovery responsibilities and exit arrangements. Clarify what is included and what is not, including related assets and records. This keeps the comparison focused on the account as a working tool: who can operate it, who remains responsible for it, and whether that division of control fits the project.