πŸ’° No Save, No Pay β€” We negotiate your software contracts. You keep 75% of savings. Zero risk. How it works β†’
Home / Case Studies / Fortune 500 Bank: Oracle + Microsoft
Case Study Oracle Microsoft Financial Services 90 Days
Case Study β€” Financial Services

How a Fortune 500 Bank Saved $4.2M on Oracle and Microsoft Contracts

A top-25 U.S. bank was 90 days from simultaneous Oracle Database and Microsoft EA renewals β€” with both vendors pushing significant price increases. Our team stepped in, ran forensic analysis on both estates, and delivered $4.2M in verified savings. The bank paid nothing until savings were confirmed.

$4.2M verified savings 25% gainshare β€” zero upfront cost
$4.2M
Verified Savings
34%
Blended Reduction
90
Days to Completion
2
Vendors Negotiated
4:1
ROI on Engagement Fee
The Challenge

Two Major Renewals. Two Vendors. Both Pushing Hard.

The bank's Oracle estate had grown organically over 14 years into a complex mix of Oracle Database Enterprise Edition with Real Application Clusters, Oracle Exadata, and a ULA that had expired two years prior without a proper certification. When Oracle's renewal team arrived, their opening position included a 22% support increase, mandatory migration to Oracle Fusion Cloud for several workloads, and a Java SE employee metric charge that would have covered 18,000 employees at $15 per employee per month.

Simultaneously, the bank's Microsoft Enterprise Agreement was expiring, and Microsoft's account team was aggressively pushing an upgrade from E3 to E5 for the entire 14,000-seat estate. The E5 pitch was anchored on Microsoft Copilot features and advanced security compliance tools β€” neither of which the bank's CISO had approved for deployment. The combined pressure from both account teams, compounding with a 60-day renewal deadline, was exactly the scenario vendors count on to close at maximum price.

The bank's internal procurement team had limited negotiation leverage because they didn't have independent visibility into Oracle's true pricing benchmarks, and they had no experience challenging Oracle's ULA expiry claims or Microsoft's E5 justification methodology. They needed expert-led negotiation, fast.

Facing a similar renewal crunch?

Our Oracle negotiation service and Microsoft negotiation service run on 25% gainshare β€” you pay nothing unless we save you money. Get a free savings estimate β†’

Our Approach

Forensic Analysis. Then Strategic Negotiation.

We began with a full Oracle License Management Services (LMS) audit review β€” not waiting for Oracle to script and run their own LMS audit, but conducting our own independent deployment analysis first. This revealed that the bank was significantly over-licensed on Oracle Database Standard Edition 2 and under-licensed on only two specific RAC clusters. We identified the Java SE employee metric claim as aggressively over-scoped: only 2,400 employees actually required Java SE, not 18,000.

On the Microsoft side, we conducted a granular Microsoft 365 utilisation analysis across 90 days of actual usage data. The analysis showed that 9,100 of 14,000 seats were using only Exchange Online, Teams, and SharePoint features fully covered by E3. Only 4,900 seats had any use case that could justify E5 β€” and even then, not the premium security features Microsoft was using to justify the full E5 price point. We built a seat-by-seat segmentation model showing the bank's actual optimal SKU mix.

For Oracle, our negotiation strategy centred on disputing the Java SE metric scope, right-sizing the ULA certification retroactively, and using competitive displacement pressure from OCI pricing benchmarks versus alternative database providers. For Microsoft, we pushed for a split-SKU EA structure with a 36-month lock-in only on the 4,900 E5 seats, preserving flexibility on the remaining E3 seats and securing a 19% price hold on the E3 cohort.

The Results

$4.2M in Verified Savings. Paid After Delivery.

Every dollar of savings was independently verified against the original renewal proposals before our gainshare fee was calculated. The bank retained 75% β€” $3.15M β€” and paid us 25% β€” $1.05M β€” only after contracts were signed and savings confirmed.

Oracle β€” Annual Support Cost
Vendor Ask
$7.8M/yr
β†’
Negotiated
$5.1M/yr
Includes right-sized Java SE scope + ULA certification dispute resolution
Microsoft EA β€” Annual License Cost
Vendor Ask
$6.2M/yr
β†’
Negotiated
$4.7M/yr
Split-SKU structure, E3 price hold, E5 deployed only where justified
Oracle Java SE β€” Annual Reduction
Oracle's Claim
$3.24M/yr
β†’
Right-Sized
$518K/yr
18,000 employees reduced to 2,400 actual Java SE users
Contract Term & Flexibility
Enhanced Rights Secured
Oracle: right to audit independently before any future Oracle LMS action. Microsoft: flex clause on 2,100 seats in year 2 with no penalty.

Want to see similar results on your Oracle or Microsoft contracts?

Our multi-vendor negotiation service handles simultaneous renewals across Oracle, Microsoft, and any other vendor in your estate. See how the gainshare model works β†’

Key Takeaways

What This Engagement Proves

βœ“
Oracle's Java SE employee metric is routinely over-scoped. Oracle's initial claim covered 18,000 employees. The correct deployment was 2,400. This is a pattern β€” Oracle applies the broadest possible interpretation of the employee metric in every negotiation. Independent analysis is the only way to challenge it with precision.
βœ“
E5 is sold on features that never get deployed. Microsoft's E5 push relied entirely on Copilot and advanced security features the bank's security team had not approved. A seat-level utilisation analysis destroys this justification. Buying E5 for 14,000 seats when only 4,900 seats can justify it is a $1.5M/year overpayment.
βœ“
Simultaneous multi-vendor renewals create dangerous pressure. Both Oracle and Microsoft knew the bank was under time pressure from two renewals at once. That time pressure is a negotiation lever for the vendor. Our engagement removed the urgency by establishing clear analytical positions on both contracts simultaneously.
βœ“
Gainshare means zero budget risk. The bank's procurement team had no budget available for external advisory fees. Our 25% gainshare model meant no upfront cost, no retainer, and no fee if we failed to deliver savings. The $1.05M engagement fee came entirely out of the $4.2M in savings we generated.
βœ“
Contractual rights matter as much as price. Securing the right to conduct independent audits before Oracle can initiate LMS is worth as much as any single-year price reduction. It changes the power dynamic in every future renewal.
"We had two of our largest vendors coming at us simultaneously with aggressive renewal proposals and a tight deadline. NoSaveNoPay's team arrived with a level of technical depth on Oracle licensing and Microsoft EA structure that our internal team simply didn't have. The Java SE analysis alone saved us $2.7M annually. We paid for the engagement out of savings we wouldn't have achieved without them."
β€” Chief Procurement Officer, Top-25 U.S. Commercial Bank
Related Case Studies

More Verified Savings Results

Zero Risk Guarantee

Could We Deliver Similar Results for You?

Tell us about your upcoming Oracle or Microsoft renewals. We'll review your contracts, estimate your savings, and tell you exactly what we'd do β€” at no cost and no obligation. If we take the engagement, you pay 25% of what we save you. Not a dollar more.

25% gainshare Β· No retainer Β· No hourly rate Β· No savings = no fee