CASE STUDY:
How we Locked in Pricing & Avoided a Post-Acquisition Price Hikes
The Challenge:
Preparing for Disruption in a Vendor Acquisition
In 2023, a vendor acquisition would disrupt the major software provider that sent shockwaves through the enterprise software market. However, for enterprise customers, this acquisition signaled a major red flag—the acquisition company had a well-documented reputation for aggressive pricing strategies, tough contract negotiations, and squeezing costs wherever possible.
The challenge wasn’t just about cost—it was about controlling their IT roadmap and ensuring a smooth, profitable exit from the platform before the acquirer made drastic changes.
The Strategy:
Locking in Stability Before Market Disruption
With deep market expertise, we recognized the urgency of the situation and immediately developed a time-sensitive strategy to protect their financial interests. Our approach focused on securing long-term pricing predictability. Instead of being forced into a pricing model, we negotiated a five-year contract that gave the technology team the time to determine future strategy.
The Execution:
Strategic Negotiations & Market Leverage
To successfully execute this strategy, we first secured executive buy-in across multiple technology leaders, aligning conflicting priorities to push a unified procurement approach. We then engaged with vendor before the acquisition was finalized, using our negotiation expertise to align contract terms with vendor’s business objectives rather than future pricing model. By leveraging our market position and timing, we negotiated a term expansion, reduced unnecessary inventory commitments, and secured significant pricing reductions.
The Results:
Cost Savings & a Controlled Exit Strategy
By acting before the acquisition closed, we locked in a long-term contract while most other software clients were forced into one-year renewals at 30-40% higher rates. This proactive move stabilized costs, created a large savings compared to projected post-acquisition rates, and gave the vendor the ability to exit the platform profitably on their own timeline. Unlike others in the market who were caught off guard by the acquisition changes, we were able to control strategy, maintaining financial stability while securing a competitive market position.
Instead of being reactionary, we helped take control—save money, mitigating risk, and creating a timeline to determine long-term infrastructure strategy.