SAP Case Study

Saving $8M on SAP Support How Licence Optimisation and Third-Party Maintenance Transformed a Manufacturing Enterprise’s Cost Structure

A global manufacturer running SAP ECC and BusinessObjects saved $8 million over three years by combining rigorous licence assessment with a strategic switch to third-party support — without disrupting operations or compromising compliance.

📅 Updated February 2026⏱ 17 min read✍️ Fredrik Filipsson
$8M
Total 3-Year Savings
53%
Support Cost Reduction
15%
Shelfware Eliminated
0
Operational Disruptions
SAP Knowledge Hub SAP Case Studies Saving $8M on SAP Support
01

The Challenge: Escalating SAP Support Costs With Diminishing Returns

The client — a mid-market manufacturing enterprise with global operations — was running SAP ECC 6.0 and SAP BusinessObjects across multiple production sites. Their annual SAP Enterprise Support bill consumed approximately $5 million per year, calculated at SAP’s standard 22% of the original licence base, with annual inflationary uplifts.

The systems were mature, stable, and deeply embedded in operations. Yet SAP’s roadmap pressures were intensifying: the 2027 end-of-mainstream-support deadline for ECC created implicit migration pressure toward S/4HANA, while the annual support costs continued climbing with zero correlation to the value received.

💰

Recurring Cost Burden

At 22% of a substantial licence base, annual support fees exceeded $5 million — with automatic uplifts meaning the figure increased every year regardless of whether additional value was delivered.

📈

Diminishing Returns

ECC and BusinessObjects were in maintenance mode. SAP’s updates for legacy systems had slowed to security patches and regulatory updates. The company was paying premium prices for a minimal service scope.

🚨

Migration Pressure

SAP’s push toward S/4HANA by 2027 threatened an additional $10–15 million in migration project costs. The CIO needed to separate the upgrade decision from the support cost decision.

📊

Budget Constraint

IT leadership faced pressure to reduce “run” costs to fund “grow” initiatives. The SAP support bill was the largest single line item in the IT operating budget and the most obvious target for optimisation.

“Over a typical five-year span, the company would pay more in SAP support fees than the original software purchase price — for systems that required virtually no vendor intervention to operate.”

02

Phase 1: Licence Assessment Reveals Hidden Savings

Redress Compliance was engaged to perform a comprehensive SAP licence utilisation assessment before any support changes were considered. The rationale was straightforward: reducing the licence base before switching support providers would lower costs under any support model.

The assessment examined every licence, user allocation, engine metric, and module across the entire SAP estate. The findings were significant but not unusual for an enterprise that had accumulated licences over a decade of SAP ownership.

Finding 1

Shelfware & Inactive Users

Dozens of named user accounts had not been accessed in over 12 months. Several BusinessObjects reporting tools purchased during initial deployment had never gained user adoption. Former employees’ accounts remained allocated with active licence assignments. Approximately 15% of the total licence estate was generating zero business value.

Finding 2

Misclassified Licence Types

A significant proportion of employees held Professional SAP user licences — the most expensive category — despite requiring only read-only report access or basic transaction entry. These users could be served by Limited Professional or Employee Self-Service licence types at a fraction of the cost.

Finding 3

Over-Provisioned Engines

Engine-based licence metrics (volume-measured modules and HANA database runtime allocations) were sized substantially above actual usage. The BusinessObjects user count licensed was significantly higher than concurrent usage justified. These over-provisions inflated the maintenance base unnecessarily.

Licence Optimisation Actions Taken

1

Shelfware Termination

All identified inactive user licences and unused module entitlements were formally terminated at the next contract anniversary. This removed approximately 15% of the licence estate from the maintenance calculation, eliminating support payments on software delivering zero value.

2

User Licence Reclassification

Over-classified Professional users were downgraded to appropriate licence types (Limited Professional or Employee Self-Service) based on verified usage patterns. This reduced the per-user maintenance cost for hundreds of employees without affecting their ability to perform required functions.

3

Engine Right-Sizing

Over-provisioned engine metrics and BusinessObjects allocations were reduced to reflect actual operational requirements plus a reasonable growth buffer. This lowered the volume-based component of the maintenance base.

The licence optimisation alone was projected to reduce annual support costs by over $250,000 per year by shrinking the maintenance base. Equally important, the exercise eliminated compliance risk — the company now had complete visibility into its actual licence position and could demonstrate full compliance in any audit scenario.

03

Phase 2: Evaluating Third-Party Support

With the licence estate optimised, the next opportunity was the remaining support cost itself. The CIO’s team evaluated third-party support as an alternative to SAP’s Enterprise Support, focusing on Rimini Street — the largest independent provider for SAP support.

The evaluation examined four dimensions: cost, service quality, risk, and strategic alignment.

DimensionSAP Enterprise SupportThird-Party (Rimini Street)
Annual cost~$5.0M (22% of licence base)~$2.3M (~50% reduction)
Annual escalationInflationary uplift each yearMulti-year fixed pricing
Custom code supportNot coveredFull coverage included
Response SLAStandard queue-basedDedicated engineer, 15-min critical response
New SAP versionsIncludedNot available
Tax & regulatory updatesIncludedIncluded (delivered as patch scripts)
3-year total cost~$15.0M~$7.0M

Risk Assessment and Mitigation

The decision to leave SAP’s official support ecosystem required careful risk analysis. The CIO and board evaluated four specific risk areas before approving the transition.

🛠️ Risk Mitigation Framework

  • No new SAP versions: Deemed acceptable. ECC and BusinessObjects were in maintenance mode with no planned feature deployments. The company was content with the current functional capability.
  • Security vulnerability patches: Mitigated by applying all available SAP patches before the switch and confirming Rimini Street’s processes for delivering critical security fixes independently of SAP.
  • Future S/4HANA migration: Planned as a separate commercial exercise. When the business case for migration materialises, new S/4HANA licences would be negotiated independently, with the savings accumulated during the third-party support period partially funding the project.
  • Vendor relationship: SAP attempted to offer a modest discount and cautioned about back-maintenance fees for re-entry. The financial analysis showed third-party support savings far exceeded any potential future re-entry cost, even in worst-case scenarios.
04

Phase 3: Executing the Transition

The transition from SAP Enterprise Support to Rimini Street was executed over a planned four-month window, coordinated with the SAP contract renewal date to ensure zero gap in coverage.

1

Formal Notice to SAP (T-minus 90 Days)

The company provided SAP with the contractually required notice of non-renewal, officially terminating the maintenance agreement. They confirmed retention of perpetual licence usage rights — the software would continue to operate; only the support services would cease.

2

Third-Party Onboarding (T-minus 60 Days)

Rimini Street’s onboarding team gathered comprehensive documentation of the SAP landscape: system architecture, custom code inventory, integration maps, and interface specifications. All available SAP support notes, patches, and technical documentation were archived for reference.

3

Final Patching and Stabilisation (T-minus 30 Days)

The IT team applied all pending SAP support packs and patches under the still-active SAP support entitlement. Systems were brought to a fully patched baseline. BusinessObjects servers received the latest stable patch. This ensured no outstanding known issues existed at the transition point.

4

Go-Live on Third-Party Support (Day 1)

Rimini Street assumed full support responsibility. Users continued operating SAP normally. Support tickets were now routed to Rimini’s dedicated engineering team. The first critical incident — a billing job failure — was triaged within 30 minutes with a bridge call between Rimini engineers and internal IT staff.

5

Post-Transition Monitoring (Months 1–6)

The company maintained heightened monitoring of support quality metrics: response times, resolution rates, and user satisfaction scores. All contractual SLAs were met or exceeded. Internal IT satisfaction surveys showed marginal improvement over the SAP support baseline, attributed to faster response and more knowledgeable engineers familiar with their custom environment.

05

Results: $8 Million in Savings Over Three Years

The combined impact of licence optimisation and third-party support delivered $8 million in cumulative savings over the three-year period following transition — a 53% reduction in total SAP support expenditure.

Savings SourceAnnual Impact3-Year Total
Support fee reduction (SAP → Rimini)~$2.5M/year~$7.5M
Licence optimisation (reduced maintenance base)~$250K/year~$0.75M
Total quantified savings~$2.7M/year~$8.0M
Strategic cost avoidance (deferred S/4HANA migration)$10–15M project deferred until genuine business case exists

Manufacturing Enterprise: $8M Saved, Zero Disruption

Starting position: $5M annual SAP support cost on stable ECC 6.0 and BusinessObjects environment with 15% shelfware and significant licence misclassification.

Actions taken: Comprehensive licence assessment, shelfware termination, user reclassification, engine right-sizing, followed by strategic transition to Rimini Street third-party support.

Financial result: $8 million cumulative savings over 3 years (53% cost reduction). $2.7 million per year redirected from maintenance to innovation. S/4HANA migration deferred until genuine business case, avoiding $10–15M in premature project costs.

Operational result: Zero service disruptions. All contractual SLAs met or exceeded. Full compliance maintained. Enhanced support for custom code and integrations. IT user satisfaction improved marginally versus SAP support baseline.

06

Operational Benefits Beyond Cost Savings

The financial results were compelling, but the operational and strategic benefits proved equally valuable over the three-year period.

📅

Extended System Life

The company comfortably continued running ECC 6.0 beyond SAP’s recommended sunset dates. With third-party support, they have coverage through 2030 and beyond, enabling migration to S/4HANA on their own timeline rather than SAP’s.

Maintained Compliance

The licence assessment and ongoing governance ensured full compliance throughout. The company reduced audit risk by eliminating shelfware and maintaining accurate records of all licence entitlements and usage.

💪

Enhanced Negotiating Position

Having demonstrated willingness to leave SAP’s ecosystem, the company now holds significant leverage for any future SAP engagement. SAP subsequently approached with offers for discounted S/4HANA licences and cloud subscriptions.

💡

Innovation Funding

The $2.7M annual savings funded previously stalled digital initiatives including advanced analytics for manufacturing operations, e-commerce platform improvements, and integration modernisation projects.

07

Understanding the Support Model Decision Framework

The decision to switch SAP support models is not binary. Enterprises must evaluate their specific circumstances against a structured framework that accounts for system maturity, upgrade plans, risk tolerance, and financial objectives. This case study illustrates the optimal scenario — a stable environment with minimal upgrade requirements — but the framework applies across a range of situations.

🟢

Strong Third-Party Candidate

Stable ECC or BW systems in maintenance mode. No major SAP upgrades planned within 3–5 years. Custom code forms a significant part of the landscape. Annual support exceeds $1 million. Internal IT team capable of managing day-to-day SAP operations.

🟠

Hybrid Approach Candidate

Active S/4HANA migration planned within 2–3 years. Some legacy systems will remain on ECC during transition. New SAP cloud products being adopted alongside stable legacy modules. Move legacy to third-party while maintaining SAP support on actively evolving components.

🔴

Stay with SAP Support

Active deployment of new SAP functionality. Ongoing S/4HANA implementation requiring support packs and enhancements. Heavy reliance on SAP’s innovation roadmap. Regulatory requirements mandate vendor-provided updates. These scenarios justify the premium of SAP Enterprise Support.

💡

Always Optimise First

Regardless of the support decision, licence optimisation delivers value. Removing shelfware, reclassifying users, and right-sizing engines reduces costs under any support model and strengthens compliance. This should be the first step in every SAP cost reduction initiative.

The manufacturing enterprise in this case study demonstrated that the financial impact of combining licence optimisation with third-party support creates a compounding savings effect. The licence audit reduced the maintenance base, which lowered costs under both SAP and third-party pricing. The third-party switch then halved the remaining support cost. Together, these actions delivered 53% total cost reduction — significantly more than either action alone would have achieved.

“The most successful SAP cost optimisation programmes treat licence management and support strategy as interconnected decisions, not independent workstreams. Optimise the estate first, then select the support model that best serves the optimised footprint.”

08

Key Lessons and Recommendations

✅ Recommendations for CIOs Considering Similar Strategies

  • Always start with a licence audit: Before any support decision, understand your actual usage. The licence assessment typically pays for itself many times over by identifying shelfware, misclassifications, and over-provisioned engines that inflate the maintenance base under any support model.
  • Right-size before switching: Optimise your licence estate first. Terminating unused licences and reclassifying users reduces cost regardless of whether you stay with SAP or move to third-party support. It also improves compliance and simplifies governance.
  • Evaluate third-party support on merit: For stable, mature SAP environments not requiring constant upgrades, third-party support typically delivers 50%+ cost reduction with equivalent or better service quality. Get references from comparable enterprises in your industry.
  • Time changes with renewal cycles: Align support transitions with contract renewal dates. Provide SAP with required notice and ensure zero gap in coverage. Use the renewal date as leverage — SAP’s awareness of potential loss creates negotiating opportunity.
  • Apply all patches before transition: Bring systems to a fully patched baseline before leaving SAP support. This maximises the starting position for the third-party provider and eliminates any outstanding known vulnerability.
  • Secure executive alignment: Present the business case with quantified savings and reinvestment plans. Address risk mitigation proactively. The $8M savings in this case was approved because leadership understood both the financial opportunity and the risk management framework.
  • Maintain licence governance post-transition: Continue regular licence usage reviews after switching support. Ensure you remain compliant with SAP’s licence terms even off maintenance — SAP retains audit rights regardless of support status.
  • Reinvest strategically: Treat the savings as an innovation fund, not a budget cut. The most successful outcomes pair support cost reduction with tangible investment in digital transformation, analytics, or operational improvement that delivers measurable business value.
09

Related SAP Support & Licensing Guides

Frequently Asked Questions

How realistic is a 50% reduction in SAP support costs?
Highly realistic for stable, mature SAP environments. Third-party support providers like Rimini Street typically charge approximately 50% of SAP’s maintenance fees for equivalent service. When combined with licence optimisation (removing shelfware and reclassifying users), total reductions of 50–60% are commonly achieved across enterprise engagements.
What happens if we need to return to SAP support later?
SAP typically requires payment of back-maintenance fees (the fees you would have paid during the period off support) to reinstate official maintenance. This cost should be factored into the long-term financial model. However, in most cases, the cumulative savings during the third-party support period far exceed the potential reinstatement cost, even in worst-case scenarios. Many enterprises also negotiate new S/4HANA contracts independently rather than reinstating legacy support.
Does switching to third-party support affect our SAP licence rights?
No. Perpetual SAP licence rights are separate from the support contract. You retain full rights to use the software you have purchased. Terminating support means you stop receiving patches, updates, and break-fix assistance from SAP, but the licences themselves remain valid and enforceable. SAP also retains audit rights regardless of support status, which is why maintaining licence compliance remains essential.
How do third-party providers handle SAP security vulnerabilities?
Reputable providers like Rimini Street maintain dedicated security teams that develop and deliver patches independently of SAP. They monitor vulnerability databases and regulatory changes, delivering critical fixes as patch scripts or configuration updates. Before switching, enterprises should confirm the provider’s security patch SLAs and apply all available SAP patches to establish a fully patched baseline.
Is a licence audit necessary before switching support providers?
Strongly recommended. The licence assessment serves two purposes: first, it reduces the maintenance base (lowering costs under either SAP or third-party support); second, it ensures you are fully compliant before the transition. Leaving SAP support with unresolved compliance issues creates unnecessary risk, as SAP retains audit rights and may be motivated to audit after a customer departure.
What types of SAP environments are best suited for third-party support?
Stable, mature environments running well-established SAP products (ECC 6.0, BusinessObjects, BW, SCM) that are not undergoing major upgrades or new module deployments. If your SAP systems are essentially in “run” mode and you are not planning to adopt new SAP functionality in the near term, third-party support delivers maximum value. Organisations actively implementing new SAP products or migrating to S/4HANA may benefit from maintaining SAP support during those projects.

Related Resources

FF

Fredrik Filipsson

Co-Founder, Redress Compliance

Fredrik Filipsson is co-founder of Redress Compliance, a specialist enterprise software licensing advisory firm. With two decades of experience in SAP, Oracle, Microsoft, and multi-vendor negotiations, Fredrik helps CIOs and procurement leaders cut costs, defend against audits, and negotiate from strength.

← Back to SAP Knowledge Hub
Always-On Advisory

🛡️ Vendor Shield — Subscription Advisory

Continuous, always-on advisory coverage across Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, Salesforce, IBM, Broadcom, and more. One subscription. Every vendor. Always prepared, never outmanoeuvred.

Learn About Vendor Shield Multi-vendor protection
Licensing Intelligence

Stay Ahead of Vendor Moves

Monthly licensing intelligence, audit alerts, and negotiation tactics from our advisory team. Trusted by 1,000+ enterprise leaders.

Subscribe Free No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.