How Redress Compliance helped a $7 billion Singapore-based telecom conglomerate save $15 million on RISE with SAP through phased adoption, benchmark-driven negotiation, and contractual safeguards against vendor lock-in.
A major Asia-Pacific telecommunications group headquartered in Singapore, with 15,000 employees and $7 billion in annual revenue, relied on SAP ECC for enterprise resource planning across finance, procurement, and supply chain.
The company ran its own data centres and was evaluating RISE with SAP to migrate to S/4HANA Cloud as a unified platform for its subsidiaries across the region.
Telecommunications
Singapore (APAC-wide operations)
SAP ECC — Finance, Procurement, Supply Chain
SAP’s initial RISE quote was approximately $50 million over five years — far above the client’s budget. The all-in-one pricing appeared to hide hefty markups on cloud infrastructure and services compared to market rates.
RISE’s Full User Equivalent (FUE) model introduced uncertainty. The client struggled to categorise its 3,500 users under the FUE system and worried about over-licensing. They were also unsure if RISE would fully cover certain indirect access scenarios — network management tools and customer self-service portals interacting with SAP data.
Handing all ERP systems to SAP’s managed cloud raised flags about loss of control. Leadership feared vendor lock-in with no easy way to switch providers or revert to in-house hosting if service or costs became unfavourable.
SAP tied a “last-chance” discount to signing before quarter-end and stressed the 2027 ECC support deadline to instil urgency. This high-pressure approach left the client feeling cornered into a massive decision on SAP’s terms.
SAP frequently uses quarter-end deadlines and ECC end-of-support timelines as pressure tactics. These “last-chance” discounts almost always reappear in the next quarter. An independent advisor can help you resist artificial urgency.
Redress performed an independent audit of the telco’s SAP usage and requirements. They found SAP’s proposal was oversized — user counts and cloud capacity were inflated well beyond actual needs. This fact-based analysis enabled the client to credibly challenge SAP’s cost assumptions.
For understanding FUE categorisation and optimisation, see SAP FUE Licensing Explained.
Redress recommended a phased RISE adoption. They negotiated for the initial contract to cover only core corporate systems, with the option to onboard additional subsidiaries later at the same discounted rate. This prevented the client from paying upfront for divisions that weren’t ready to migrate, aligning costs with actual rollout.
Using market benchmarks, Redress showed the initial offer was overpriced compared to peer deals. They led a data-driven negotiation, breaking down SAP’s bundled pricing component by component. Facing a well-informed customer with a viable alternative (remaining on in-house infrastructure), SAP ultimately conceded about 30% off the initial price.
Redress secured critical safeguards in the finalised agreement:
Adjust user volumes annually (up or down by ~10%) to match actual needs, with no penalty.
Strict cap on future price increases, preventing cost creep over the 5-year term.
Right to leave the RISE arrangement at renewal without punitive fees, protecting against long-term lock-in.
Contract explicitly addresses data residency and includes SAP’s digital access provisions for third-party integrations, eliminating surprise compliance costs.
For RISE exit terms and lock-in protections, see RISE with SAP: Impact on Existing Licences and Shelfware.
Initial offer: $50M over 5 years. Negotiated deal: ~$35M — a 30% reduction. By unbundling components, the client pays cloud fees at market-competitive rates instead of SAP’s premium.
The company isn’t forced into an all-at-once migration. Additional subsidiaries can be onboarded later at the locked-in discounts, aligning spend with actual readiness.
Exit rights in place at renewal. All known integrations and data location requirements are outlined in the agreement, ensuring no hidden compliance or data sovereignty risks.
Not one-size-fits-all. ±10% annual volume adjustment, price escalation cap, digital access provisions, and phased subsidiary onboarding — all negotiated into the final agreement.
“Without Redress’s guidance, we likely would have overpaid and locked ourselves into a rigid contract. Their expertise gave us leverage to secure a deal on our terms — we saved over $10 million and, just as critically, gained the flexibility to manage SAP as our business evolves.”
— CFO, Asia-Pacific Telecom Conglomerate
FUE is SAP’s consumption-based licensing model for S/4HANA Cloud. Users are weighted by type: Advanced users count as 1.0 FUE, Core users as 0.2 FUE, and Self-Service users as approximately 0.033 FUE. The total FUE count determines your subscription cost. Companies frequently over-license because they miscategorise users at the more expensive tiers. An independent audit can typically reduce FUE requirements by 20–40%. See our FUE licensing guide.
Yes. SAP prefers large upfront commitments, but phased adoption is negotiable. In this case, the initial contract covered only core corporate systems, with locked-in discounts for onboarding additional subsidiaries later. This approach prevents paying for divisions not ready to migrate and aligns costs with actual rollout timelines.
SAP routinely uses quarter-end and year-end deadlines to pressure customers into signing. While the specific discount number may change, equivalent or better discounts are almost always available in subsequent quarters. The key is not letting artificial urgency drive a decision worth tens of millions of dollars. An independent advisor can help you resist pressure and negotiate on your timeline.
Not automatically. RISE contracts may or may not include provisions for third-party systems accessing SAP data (e.g., customer portals, CRM integrations, IoT platforms). In this case, Redress negotiated explicit digital access provisions into the contract, ensuring that network management tools and self-service portals would not trigger surprise compliance costs. Always insist on written coverage for your specific integration scenarios.
For large enterprise deals ($20M+), discounts of 25–40% off SAP’s initial quote are achievable with proper benchmarking and negotiation. This case achieved 30% ($15M savings). Smaller deals typically see 15–25% discounts. Without independent benchmarking, most enterprises accept SAP’s first or second offer, which is rarely competitive.
We’ll benchmark your deal, maximise value, and minimise risk — whether you’re a $7B telecom or a mid-market enterprise navigating SAP’s cloud transition.
This case study is part of our RISE with SAP Guide pillar. Explore related case studies and guides: