Services· Cost of AI and software·Where does my budget go furthest?
Vanguard · Guide
Is that license you renew every year still worth what it costs?
We pay for a hundred features and use six.
A verdict on what you pay in licenses against the full cost of building it. If building wins, the code is yours.
Licensed Software ReplacementSend this page to whoever decides
This sounds like you if
- The renewal arrived with an increase, and what gets used of the product is a fraction.
- The customization already costs more than the license underneath it.
- The vendor changed its licensing model and the numbers stopped adding up.
Use this today, without hiring anyone
Four lines you can pull from what you already have, and they change the conversation at the next renewal. Do them before you talk to the vendor:
- What you really use. Active users last quarter against paid seats, and features used against features licensed. Pull it from the product's own usage log, not from anyone's memory.
- What staying costs. License, customization and the internal hours that hold it up, over three years and with the renewal increase included.
- What leaving costs. Data migration, running both systems side by side during the cutover, and whatever the contract charges you to go.
- What building costs, and keeps costing. Not only the build: consumption, maintenance and the person who answers for it in year two.
If line two does not clearly exceed lines three and four together, the answer is to stay and renegotiate. That number is also useful at the table with the vendor.
How we solve it
The method, not the promise.
- What you use of the license gets measured from the product's own log: users, features, integrations and customization.
- The full cost of staying gets compared against the full cost of building, over three years, with the assumptions written down so you can argue them.
- The verdict gets issued: stay, renegotiate, replace a part or replace it all. With the complete functional specification, which is yours even if you never build.
- If building wins, it gets built in modules with a cut after each one, on open tools and with the code in a repository in your name.
- It gets handed over with an operating manual, escalation criteria and a written retirement criterion.
What you receive
- Real usage of the license against what you pay for it.
- The three year full cost comparison, with the assumptions open.
- The written verdict and the complete functional specification, yours even if you never build.
- If you decide to build: the application in production, with the code in your name and its operating manual.
The proof that applies here
- Two corporate products taken to the Gartner Magic Quadrant, from the side that decides what gets built and what does not.
Before you hire
The verdict is delivered in full when the answer is to keep the license too. Savings get compared, not promised: the license turns into consumption and maintenance, and both are written into the numbers.
The verdict is contracted and paid for before anyone talks about building. The specification that comes out of it is yours, and you can take it to whichever builder you choose. The build, if it comes, is a separate contract you ask for after reading it.
Of what you pay for that license today, how much does your team actually use?
In the cycle
If the problem is a different one
We were told to bring the budget down and every owner defends their application.
Technology spend rationalization
We have the AI licenses, and my team is busy keeping what already exists running.
Forward Deployed Engineers
We built it with AI in a week, it worked, and now the whole operation uses it.
AI-Built Software Rescue
