Many organizations move to the public cloud expecting lower total cost of ownership, but the savings often don’t show up because of how they migrate.
The most common issue is a **“lift and shift” or direct-match migration**—moving existing servers, storage, and applications to the cloud *as they are*, without rethinking capacity needs.
Key problems highlighted in the data:
- According to an analysis of **more than 60,000 workloads** by Bain & Company and AWS, a poorly planned direct-match migration can be **10%–15% more expensive** than keeping workloads on-premise.
- Using AWS Migration Evaluator, they found that **84% of on-premise workloads are overprovisioned**—meaning companies are paying for excess compute and storage they don’t actually use.
- When this excess capacity is moved unchanged to the cloud, companies simply **transfer their inefficiencies** to a new environment.
- In a survey of **more than 350 IT decision makers**, the top disappointment with cloud deployments was that **cost of ownership had not declined**.
In short, cloud migration doesn’t automatically lower costs. Without upfront analysis and rightsizing, organizations often pay more for the same (or unused) capacity in a different place.