Once the license is on the wall, does the assignment still make sense

I'm most of the way through the licensing process and I've realized I never decided what happens to the reverse wholesaling side afterward.

The case for keeping it as an assignment is that it's the same work I'm already doing. A known buyer gives me a written box, I go find the house, I contract it as a principal, I assign it and get paid a fee that isn't tied to a percentage of anything. On a deeply discounted house the fee can be several times what a percentage would produce, and I'm not answerable to a brokerage for how I sourced it.

The case for routing it through the license is that the buyer relationship is repeat business, and representing them on the purchase turns one fee into a stream. No deposit at risk, no contract sitting in my name, no question about whether I'm marketing an interest I don't own. If the same buyer places orders against the same box every month, an ongoing representation arrangement may be worth more over two years than three assignment fees.

The complication is that a licensee acting as a principal has disclosure obligations, and how those work, what the brokerage's policy allows, and whether the commission treats any of this differently is a state by state question I'd need answered by my broker and an attorney where I'm licensed. So this isn't a poll about what's permitted. It's a poll about what people who hold a license actually chose to do with the deals they source themselves, and I'd like to hear the reasoning either way.