Skip to content

Compare

Renting a platform against owning one, as a category

The argument on this page is about the model rather than about any vendor. It applies to every hosted streaming platform including the good ones, and it works in both directions — there is a volume below which renting is simply cheaper, and this page says where it is rather than pretending it does not exist.

Two cost curves, and the shape is the whole argument

A rented platform is a variable cost. It starts near zero, which is its great virtue, and it rises with usage — bytes delivered, minutes encoded, sessions measured. The curve has no ceiling, and its slope is set by somebody else's rate card.

An owned platform is a fixed cost with a step. It starts high, because capacity is bought before it is needed, and then it is flat: inside the commitment the marginal viewer costs nothing. It steps when the commitment is renegotiated, and between steps it does not care how successful you are.

Everything else people argue about downstream of this — control, residency, exit risk, customisation — follows from where the machines are. The curve is the reason the machines are there.

Where the curves cross, and why the answer is regional

The crossover is not a universal number, but the inputs are always the same five: delivered volume per month, catalogue size and growth, peak concurrency, encode hours including re-encodes, and the amortisation period your finance side will accept. Given those, both curves resolve and can be compared honestly.

Geography moves the crossover more than most operators expect, because the rented curve is not the same everywhere. On the North American card the per-gigabyte rate falls 4.25× across the volume tiers, which is what lets a large service rent delivery and still have a margin. On the South Asian card it falls 1.51×. Tripling delivered volume there multiplies the bill 2.89× and improves the blended rate by 3.8% — so scale, which is the standard answer to a rising rented bill, is not available.

That is why an argument that reads as ideological in one market is arithmetic in another. A service in Dhaka and a service in Denver making the same decision are not making the same decision.

Below roughly a terabyte a month, renting wins and it is not close. The commitment sits idle, the hardware depreciates against traffic that is not there, and the meter is genuinely the cheaper instrument. Any vendor telling you otherwise at that volume is selling.

Specification

What each model actually costs you, beyond the invoice

The columns most comparisons leave out, because neither is a line item.

RentedOwned
Cost at launchNear zero — the model's real advantageCapacity bought before the audience arrives
Cost at scaleRises with every viewer, with no ceilingFlat inside the commitment; steps when it is renegotiated
Who carries hardware failureThe vendor. Genuinely worth somethingYou, or whoever you pay to be on call
Utilisation riskNone — you pay for what you useYours. Below plan is money already spent
ExitA migration project on their timetableNothing moves; support stops and the estate keeps running
Data residencyWherever they host itWherever you put the machines
Speed to launchDays to weeksWeeks to months, gated by procurement and metadata
Who you depend onA vendor's roadmap and their continued existenceYour own operations capability, and the runbooks you hold
Four of these eight favour renting. A comparison in which one column wins every row is a brochure.

The one question that settles it

How many terabytes did you deliver last month, and where were the viewers? Everything else on this page is downstream of that pair, and most operators evaluating platforms cannot answer it from CDN logs — they answer it from an estimate, which is how a decision this size ends up being made on a feeling.

Get the number first. Then run both curves against it, including ours, and let the arithmetic be the argument. If it says rent, rent — that outcome is on this page because it is a real one, and a vendor whose comparison page cannot produce it is not comparing anything.

Run it against your own numbers

The calculator on the pricing page uses published rates and shows its arithmetic. It is allowed to come out against us, and below about a terabyte a month it does.