Case Studies

The Principles, applied — and what they returned.

How growing organizations applied the Parsimoney™ Principles to supplier pricing decisions — the decision taken, the numbers behind it and the resulting return.

Every case study names the Parsimoney Principles it applied, so you can read the idea and the outcome side by side.

IT Infrastructure · Global manufacturer (anonymized)

What if six contracts became one?

A fragmented ~$1.067M three-year projection became a ~$600K global enterprise agreement — same technology, one customer.

~$467KTotal saving over three years
~$1.067M
Fragmented baseline
~$600K
Enterprise agreement
~$467K
Three-year difference
Principle 01Principle 02Principle 08Principle 10
Read the case study
Insurance brokerage · Canadian enterprise, CFO and Risk leadership (anonymized)

Nobody knew if the price was still good

A $985K broker relationship met the market for the first time in years — and the program was reset 51% lower.

$1.520MTotal saving over three years
$985K
Incumbent compensation
$1.435M
Awarded three-year TCO
$1.520M
TCO improvement
Principle 02Principle 03Principle 06Principle 07
Read the case study
Enterprise Software · Global marketing organization (anonymized)

How far should you push an incumbent?

Annual spend reset from ~$585K to $440K over successive renewals — with supplier proposals landing at $388K–$394K and an ambitious $350K anchor testing what was actually attainable.

~$435KCumulative saving over three years
$585K
Original annual spend
$440K
Spend before this renewal
$388K
Lowest supplier proposal
Principle 03Principle 04Principle 06Principle 08
Read the case study
IT · Enterprise IT organization (anonymized)

Do we actually know what this should cost?

A ~$735K annual run rate met a real market for the first time — and the challenger, not the incumbent, won.

~$1.7MTotal benefit over three years
~$735K
Current run rate
~$371K
Incumbent renewal
~$422K
Challenger model
Principle 02Principle 03Principle 06Principle 08
Read the case study
Enterprise software · Global enterprise software customer (anonymized)

A $2.7 million saving that wasn't a saving

$2.714M of value over three years — correctly called cost avoidance, not savings.

$2.714MValue delivered over three years
$9.099M
Future-state TCO
$6.385M
Executed TCO
$2.714M
Value delivered
Principle 01Principle 04Principle 09Principle 10
Read the case study