A global SaaS provider was renewing a five-year AWS Enterprise Discount Program with a proposed commit that tracked the prior plan rather than the company's actual consumption curve. Eighteen weeks later, the renewed EDP landed at $7.4M below the opening proposal, with Marketplace lift correctly attributed and a documented framework for Savings Plans interaction inside the commit.
The provider was operating on a five-year EDP that had been negotiated when product mix and customer geography looked very different. The renewal proposal carried the prior commit shape forward with a top-down uplift, while the Marketplace stack had grown into a material part of cloud spend without being correctly attributed to the EDP lift mechanic.
The AWS account team proposed a five-year commit roughly 14% above the prior plan, held the headline discount at the existing tier, and left the Marketplace lift mechanic vague. The proposal also nudged the provider toward a higher Savings Plans coverage ratio that would have absorbed flexibility the provider needed for its own product roadmap.
A larger commit at the same discount tier is a price increase in disguise. The real conversation is about discount-per-dollar-of-commit and how Marketplace lift is attributed, not about the headline commit number.
We rebuilt the consumption forecast from the bottom up against the provider's own product roadmap, separating predictable workloads from growth workloads. The output: a defensible commit shape that tracked actual demand, not formula uplift.
Audited the Marketplace stack and built a master tagging schema so every eligible Marketplace dollar contributed to EDP lift. The audit alone uncovered eight figures of historically misattributed spend.
Documented exactly how Savings Plans coverage interacts with EDP commit consumption, so the provider could keep flexibility on the growth portion without sacrificing predictable-workload discount.
Reframed the conversation from commit size to discount-per-dollar, anchoring on Marketplace-inclusive lift rather than the headline EDP rate.
We drafted the position paper. The provider's VP of Cloud presented it. Our team ran the follow-up sessions across financial, technical and commercial reviews.
EDP renewal looks like a commit-size negotiation. The leverage lives in the lift mechanic, the Marketplace attribution and the way Savings Plans count against commit consumption. Get those three right and the headline commit shape follows.
The renewed EDP carried a five-year commit shaped against the actual consumption forecast, with all eligible Marketplace spend counted at full lift and a written framework explaining Savings Plans interaction with EDP consumption.
Tell us the commit shape, the renewal date and the Marketplace position. We will respond within one business day with the lead and the most relevant precedent.