A Global Fortune 250 with 48,000 employees and 350+ corporate locations. Leadership demanded $5M in annualized IT cost reduction. Telmac negotiated across 10 spend categories, 6 vendors, and delivered more than five times the original mandate.
Global Fortune 250 | 48,000 Employees | 350+ Corporate Locations | $14B Annual Revenue | 8,000 Retail Locations
Leadership had issued a directive: pull $5M in annualized costs out of IT, immediately. The organization had the size and the spend to make it possible — but limited internal personnel to execute across multiple vendor categories simultaneously, and vendors entrenched in their pricing positions within 6-months.
Without market benchmarks across all 10 spend categories, there was no leverage. Without a third-party advisor who had visibility into comparable organizations, there was no basis for challenging what vendors claimed was fair market pricing. The mandate was real. The path to it was not.
A $5M annualized savings target required simultaneous renegotiation across WAN, mobility, managed CPE, DIA, contact center, and five additional spend categories — with limited personnel to execute any of it independently.
Years of auto-renewals and a lack of competitive pressure had allowed vendors to establish pricing well above market. Without a third-party advisor with visibility into comparable enterprise spending, challenging those positions was nearly impossible.
The organization had no mechanism to assess whether what it was paying across ten categories was market-competitive. Technology gaps and contractual waste were invisible without the external lens that Telmac brought.
Ten spend categories negotiated simultaneously. Six vendors moved off entrenched positions. One engagement that delivered five times the original mandate.
The WAN negotiation alone delivered $12M in three-year savings. With market benchmarks in hand, the gap between what was being paid and what was fair became impossible for the vendor to defend.
$5M in mobility savings. Improved diversity, better licensing terms, and contract structures that actually reflected the organization’s usage patterns, not outdated phone plans.
A $25M savings result that delivered more than five times the requested target. Managed CPE, DIA, and Contact Center added $7.8M more. Every category was a total success for our client.
This wasn’t a single-vendor negotiation or a telecom audit. It required Telmac to operate simultaneously across 10 spend categories, 6 vendors, and the full complexity of a Fortune 250 procurement environment — with the organizational leverage to hold vendor positions accountable.
When you have market benchmarks across all ten categories and a Fortune 250’s spending power behind you, vendors can’t sustain positions that aren’t defensible. The leverage was always there. It just needed to be organized.
Telmac conducted a complete analysis of existing technology and contracts across all 10 spend categories — identifying technology gaps, pricing waste, and contractual exposure that the organization’s internal teams hadn’t been positioned to see.
Telmac vigorously negotiated across WAN, Mobility, Managed CPE, DIA, Contact Center, and five additional categories — applying market benchmarks, competitive pressure, and the organization’s scale to extract pricing and terms the vendors had never voluntarily offered.
Every negotiated outcome was documented in improved contract terms — shorter commitments, better licensing structures, and provisions that reduce exposure at the next renewal. The savings are repeatable, not a one-cycle event.
Organizations that set conservative targets often leave the most significant savings on the table. The $25M outcome wasn’t luck — it was the result of systematic analysis revealing that every category was mispriced, not just the most obvious ones.
Vendors maintain pricing above market because buyers don’t know the difference. Market benchmarks remove that asymmetry. Once the gap is visible, the vendor’s position is no longer a negotiating stance — it’s a liability.
Renegotiating 10 categories across 6 vendors requires both the expertise to benchmark each one and the capacity to execute simultaneously. That’s not a gap in organizational capability — it’s a structural constraint that external engagement resolves.
The Fortune 250 in this case study targeted a $5M savings goal for our project. The outcome was more than $25M. The difference was market benchmarks, external leverage, and the capacity to execute across all categories at once.
