Cai's answer is of course correct. I'd still like to share my thoughts, especially on the question "How do you usually handle case like this?"
In recent years I have been trying to work with Paul Rand's "The Politics of Design" in mind. I'd like to share a few lines from the very relevant post:
The designer who voluntarily presents his client with a batch of
layouts does so not out prolificacy, but out of uncertainty or fear. […]
Bent on impressing the client with their ardor, they present a welter
of layouts, many of which are superficial interpretations of
potentially good ideas, or slick renderings of trite ones.
Naturally, I make at least a few different designs, but in the end I try to present only one to the client. The one I think is best for their needs.
Also important, Steve Jobs on working with Rand:
I asked him if he would come up with a few options, and he said, 'No,
I will solve your problem for you and you will pay me. You don’t have
to use the solution. If you want options go talk to other people. […]'
I use these thoughts to convey to my clients that I can't produce several different designs that are equally good. One is the best I can think of or I can make. It is a waste of time to voluntarily produce worse alternatives just so the good one sticks out.
With revisions it's a little different and if the contract allows, I will explore options on one design, together with the client.
In the end, my answer is: try to condition the client's expectations from the beginning of the relationship, so they don't expect multiple designs. Work together with regular briefings and refine. In the end, the client will believe they produced the work themselves, but I take this as proof I did my job well.