Cloud

Your cloud bill has a number in it nobody has looked at.

Two weeks, read-only access, and a written report where every finding carries a dollar figure and an estimate of the work needed to capture it. Then a fixed quote to do the work — which you're free to ignore.

FeeFixed, quoted per scope Duration10 business days AccessRead-only PlatformsAWS · Azure · GCP

Scope

What gets examined

Ordered the way the report is ordered — by dollars returned per hour of work, not by service name.

Where it hides

Most of the money sits in two places

A rough shape of where cloud findings tend to land. Your split will differ; the ordering rarely does.

65% TOP TWO CAUSES
  • 38% Commitment coverage — reserved instances and savings plans modelled against twelve months of real usage
  • 27% Idle and over-provisioned resources, including everything running overnight for no reason
  • 18% Storage lifecycle — tiering, orphaned volumes, snapshot sprawl
  • 11% Network — cross-zone traffic, egress, idle load balancers and NAT gateways
  • 6% Licensing and support tiers that attach a percentage to everything else

Deliverable

What you get on day fourteen

A written report, not a dashboard. Each finding states the current monthly cost, the expected cost after the change, the implementation effort in hours, and the risk of doing it. Findings are ranked so you can stop reading once the numbers stop justifying the work.

A fixed-price implementation quote. Separate document, no obligation. If you'd rather your own team does the work, the report is written to be handed straight to an engineer.

An hour of walkthrough. Usually the most useful part, because the questions your team asks reveal which findings are politically or technically blocked.

You keep everything either way. There is no locked portal and nothing expires.

Fit

When this is worth it — and when it isn't

Worth it if you're spending more than about $30,000 a month on cloud, your environment has grown faster than anyone has had time to tidy it, and nobody currently owns the bill as their actual job.

Probably not worth it below roughly $20,000 a month — the findings usually won't clear the cost of the work, and we'd rather tell you that on the first call than invoice you for a thin report. If that's you, the observability or SaaS audit is often the better use of the same budget.

Questions

The ones we get asked first

What access do you actually need?

A read-only role, plus access to your billing exports. No write permissions, no deployment rights, nothing that can change state. We'll send the exact policy document before you create anything, and it expires at the end of the engagement.

Why fixed fee rather than a share of savings?

Because measuring "savings" honestly is harder than it sounds — usage changes, prices change, and arguing about what counts is a bad way to start a working relationship. A fixed fee means the report says what we actually found. If you'd prefer a success-based structure for a first engagement, ask; we'll consider it.

Will you just tell us to buy reserved instances?

Commitments usually are a large share of the finding, because they're the fastest money. But buying them badly locks in the wrong shape for three years, so the report models coverage against your real usage curve and says explicitly what not to commit.

Do you resell anything or take vendor commissions?

No. No reseller agreements, no referral fees, no vendor sponsorship. That independence is the only reason the report is worth reading.

What if you don't find enough to justify the fee?

We'd rather establish that on the first call from a billing export than after invoicing you. If the numbers don't support it, we'll say so and we won't proceed.

Also available

The other audits

Next step

Send one month of billing data.

Fifteen minutes and a cost export is enough for us to tell you whether an audit is worth your money.

Start a conversation