Curious what happens to resources and reservations if Usage goes out of business? Three years is actually a pretty long horizon to rely on a startup still being around.
I guess you could still sell them on the RI marketplace.
Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
51–60 of 68 posts
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#52Curious what happens to resources and reservations if Usage goes out of business? Three years is actually a pretty long horizon to rely on a startup still being around.
It's an asset on their books, but I doubt any of their investors/creditors can get any real use out of them. So my guess is AWS gets to keep that extra $$$.
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#53Why is AWS okay with this-- Isn't this profit that should be in their pocket?
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#54Why is AWS okay with this-- Isn't this profit that should be in their pocket?
Why would AWS complain? A company coming along and converting some of their month-to-month instances into 3-year billing commitments while taking on all the risk is fantastic from their perspective. No wonder they are encouraging it.
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#55Curious what happens to resources and reservations if Usage goes out of business? Three years is actually a pretty long horizon to rely on a startup still being around.
It's an asset on their books, but I doubt any of their investors/creditors can get any real use out of them. So my guess is AWS gets to keep that extra $$$.
I think what they mean is, does the Usage.ai customer get stuck with long RI's that they now can't get rid of because usage.ai can't buy it back
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an asset on their books, but I doubt any of their investors/creditors can get any real use out of them. So my guess is AWS gets to keep that extra $$$.
I think what they mean is, does the Usage.ai customer get stuck with long RI's that they now can't get rid of because usage.ai can't buy it back
You can sell RIs on the RI marketplace.
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#57How would you describe the mechanics of this in regular finance terms... Almost like you are providing mortgages for reserved instances? I think I understand the model here, but I guess I'm curious how you model in risk of suddenly getting stuck with a bunch of 3 year RI commitments?
I like to say we're a marketmaker for cloud contracts. Our recommendations take our current inventory into account and it's been very effective considering the amount of 'trades' we successfully make each day. That aside, We also have a considerable amount of cash set aside for an event like this.
Is the inventory risk assumed by usage?
Reading through your T&C it looks like you refund us with credits on your platform - sounds like monopoly money to me?
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an asset on their books, but I doubt any of their investors/creditors can get any real use out of them. So my guess is AWS gets to keep that extra $$$.
I think what they mean is, does the Usage.ai customer get stuck with long RI's that they now can't get rid of because usage.ai can't buy it back
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#59Can I do this twice to get a compound effect?
Re: Show HN: Usage 2.0 – Cut AWS Spend by 57% in 5 Minutes
#60> We buy Reserved Instances on your behalf (a billing layer change only) and bundle them with guaranteed buyback This is by setting your AWS account as the payer account so you can aggregate? I’m curious how the finances will work out - at least one of them had challenges balancing their RIs with customer changes since there wasn’t a feedback cue for developers not to change instance types casually. On a marketing le…
This is mainly in reference to the fact that Reserved Instances don't have any bearing on the instances themselves (ie. no code change, performance chance, server downtime, etc.). The 57% savings is the difference between the 3-year, no-upfront, standard Reserved Instance rate and the On-demand rate (for RDS it is 30% vs on-demand) As far as compute savings plans: 1-yr SP is anywhere from 26-29% savings vs on-demand…
I'm a huge user of RIs, I like the idea of tools to balance them more easily, etc. Totally on board with that but the way the number is presented seems to me like you're setting yourself up to over-promise and under-deliver, not to mention turning off people who are familiar enough with this to already be using RIs / CSPs somewhat. Simply qualifying it to “Cut AWS EC2 spend by up to 57%” would avoid some of that, and you could probably address the latter users with some hard data about flexibility or total net savings by other customers so people could get an idea of what it looks like for normal users who aren't just buying acres of EC2 instances and nothing else.