This is really interesting, kudos to the creator! My only note is that Vercel is probably paying less than you and me, in which case the spread is a bit greater than the "vs. retail" comparison.
As I type this the responses are mostly negative, so to balance that I'd like to point out that (1) integration is often undervalued, and (2) nothing prevents developers from using the other services directly, or even creating and managing their own databases, object storage, etc.
My point is that Vercel's markup is higher than what's listed if Vercel is paying less than retail. As a specific example, if Vercel is paying Neon 10¢/GB/month for storage, Vercel's markup vs. their costs is 200% instead of 150%.
Comments
This is really interesting, kudos to the creator! My only note is that Vercel is probably paying less than you and me, in which case the spread is a bit greater than the "vs. retail" comparison.
As I type this the responses are mostly negative, so to balance that I'd like to point out that (1) integration is often undervalued, and (2) nothing prevents developers from using the other services directly, or even creating and managing their own databases, object storage, etc.
The point isn't to care about what Vercel is paying but what you the end user are paying/saving when using the two services being compared.
My point is that Vercel's markup is higher than what's listed if Vercel is paying less than retail. As a specific example, if Vercel is paying Neon 10¢/GB/month for storage, Vercel's markup vs. their costs is 200% instead of 150%.