We Spent $2 Million Leaving AWS. Then We Spent $3 Million Coming Back.
Summary
A company spent $2.1 million over 18 months to repatriate its entire infrastructure from AWS to a colocation facility, driven by the belief that cloud services were too expensive and on-premise solutions would yield significant savings. This involved purchasing physical servers, negotiating bandwidth, and hiring a dedicated operations team. However, by February 2026, the company reversed course, returning to AWS at an additional cost of $3 million, illustrating what they term the "Cloud Exit Paradox." Initial spreadsheet projections had suggested a 60% annual savings by moving off AWS, with an annual AWS bill of $1.4 million compared to $600K for hardware amortization and $200K for colocation space and power.
Key takeaway
For Directors of Infrastructure or VPs of Engineering considering cloud repatriation to reduce costs, recognize that the "Cloud Exit Paradox" can result in far greater expenses than anticipated. Your team should conduct a comprehensive, multi-year total cost of ownership analysis that includes migration, operational overhead, and potential re-migration costs before committing to an exit strategy.
Key insights
Repatriating cloud infrastructure can lead to significant, unforeseen costs, often exceeding initial cloud expenses.
Principles
- Cloud repatriation carries substantial hidden costs.
- Initial cost projections often underestimate complexity.
In practice
- Thoroughly audit all hidden costs of infrastructure migration.
- Evaluate total cost of ownership beyond direct hardware/colo.
Topics
- Cloud Repatriation
- AWS Costs
- Cloud Exit Paradox
- Infrastructure Migration
- On-Premise Infrastructure
Best for: VP of Engineering/Data, Director of AI/ML, Entrepreneur, CTO, Executive, IT Professional
Related on AIssential
Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Machine Learning on Medium.