Removing €300k+ in annual technology cost from a growing health SaaS.

Context

A steadily growing SaaS carried a technology structure built for a very different company.

The client operated a subscription-based health platform with applications, video content, livestreams, APIs, external integrations, and a steadily growing user base. It did not require hyperscale infrastructure, but it did need dependable performance, controlled growth, and a platform capable of evolving over many years.

The company initially approached Neoground because its software had become increasingly difficult to maintain. Errors, performance bottlenecks, peak-usage constraints, and repeated technical interventions were consuming attention that should have gone into the product and business.

The software problems were real, but they were symptoms of a wider structure. Hosting, operating systems, media delivery, livestreaming, specialist tools, custom applications, and external suppliers had accumulated without one economic or architectural model governing them.

Technology and cost reconstruction

The company was paying for scale, specialization, and dependency it did not need.

Neoground mapped the platform across infrastructure, software, licences, media delivery, livestreaming, internal workflows, third-party tools, supplier contracts, operating responsibilities, and recurring costs.

The resulting view showed that spending had become detached from the company's actual growth profile. Expensive components were often retained because they had once solved a problem, appeared enterprise-grade, or were difficult to question after years of supplier-led development.

The same pattern appeared across several layers. A premium bare-metal server concentrated the complete production environment in one machine. Proprietary operating-system costs continued without a compelling technical need. Specialized media and livestreaming contracts charged enterprise-level fees for capabilities that could be delivered through more modern commodity services.

External tools also held metadata and operating functions that belonged closer to the product itself. This increased cost while making the SaaS more dependent on APIs, supplier interfaces, and fragmented sources of truth.

• One expensive production server carried excessive operational concentration.
• Internal RAID protected disks but did not provide full application or infrastructure redundancy.
• Proprietary server licensing added recurring cost without creating equivalent product value.
• Video distribution and livestreaming contracts were disproportionately expensive.
• Media metadata and operating workflows were distributed across external tools.
• Repeated agency and supplier transitions had produced successive rebuilds rather than one durable platform direction.

Infrastructure redesign

Right-size the architecture for the business, then build resilience into it.

Neoground replaced the oversized single-server model with a smaller, modular Linux-based infrastructure. Database, application, API, and supporting service responsibilities could be separated where this improved resilience, maintenance, or future scalability.

The platform software required only controlled adjustments to operate effectively across the new structure. The company retained its product while gaining a foundation that could be expanded incrementally instead of replacing one increasingly expensive server with an even larger one.

Moving to a more suitable provider reduced infrastructure costs further while improving the quality and reliability of the operating environment. The Linux foundation also removed unnecessary proprietary server licensing and created a cleaner basis for automation, monitoring, deployment, and maintenance.

• Replaced the oversized bare-metal server with a modular server fleet.
• Separated database, application, API, and supporting service responsibilities.
• Introduced genuine infrastructure and service redundancy.
• Migrated from the proprietary server environment to a modern Linux foundation.
• Moved production to a more suitable and cost-efficient provider.
• Adapted the platform for higher concurrency and more predictable peak performance.
• Reduced recurring infrastructure spend by at least €6,000 annually before licensing and provider savings.

Media operating model

The largest savings came from taking back control of video and livestream delivery.

The company paid approximately €10,000 per month to a specialist media distribution supplier for video processing and streaming. Neoground replaced that relationship with an enterprise-grade video delivery service integrated behind the company's own platform boundaries.

The product retained control of accounts, access rights, content metadata, course relationships, and presentation. The specialist provider supplied media capability without becoming the architecture of the SaaS itself. This removed roughly €100,000 in annual cost while preserving dependable delivery.

Paywalled livestreaming followed the same principle. Neoground implemented an elastic cloud-based streaming architecture capable of serving several thousand concurrent viewers and scaling when required. The former specialized livestream contract could be cancelled, removing approximately another €80,000 in annual spend.

An office-based transcoding appliance and parts of the surrounding media workflow also became unnecessary. High-quality source material could move through the new digital pipeline directly, supporting Full HD and 4K video and livestreams where the old environment had largely remained constrained around 720p.

1. 01

   Video library delivery

   The expensive specialist distribution contract was replaced with an enterprise-grade service behind a controlled platform integration.

2. 02

   Livestreaming

   A scalable cloud streaming stack replaced a high-cost specialist provider while preserving paywalled access.

3. 03

   Media processing

   Hardware-based office transcoding gave way to a simpler digital workflow supported by sufficient network capacity.

4. 04

   Content quality

   The platform gained reliable Full HD and 4K delivery instead of designing around former 720p constraints.

5. 05

   Metadata ownership

   Content structure, metadata, access rules, and library management moved into the SaaS backend where they could support the complete product.

6. 06

   Provider optionality

   Media suppliers became replaceable implementation components rather than permanent product dependencies.

Systems and platform direction

Stop rebuilding the product in fragments and establish one durable platform model.

The company's technical history followed a recurring pattern. A supplier or internal team built a solution, the business expanded, constraints accumulated, and a later team replaced large parts of the system with another locally coherent but strategically disconnected implementation.

Neoground connected the application interface, APIs, mobile and external applications, media systems, integrations, new product areas, and operating backend through one platform direction. Each layer could evolve independently, but all followed shared principles for data ownership, interfaces, permissions, deployment, and product structure.

Functions that belonged to the product — such as media metadata, library management, access logic, and integration state — were brought into the platform backend. Specialist external providers remained available where they created real leverage, but their data models and interfaces no longer governed the complete product.

Leadership gained a clearer technology trajectory. New features and services could be assessed against the same platform model rather than creating another isolated tool, integration, or future rewrite.

• One coherent direction across UI, backend, APIs, applications, media, and integrations
• Clear ownership of product data and operational metadata
• Stable boundaries around replaceable external services
• Fewer subscriptions and fragmented administrative interfaces
• A modernized software foundation with higher performance and maintainability
• A platform roadmap designed to absorb future growth without repeated reinvention

The strategic judgment

The decisive move was not cheaper hosting. It was separating product capability from inherited vendor cost.

A narrow infrastructure project could have saved several thousand euros while leaving the larger supplier and platform structure untouched. A software-only intervention could have improved performance while preserving the contracts and operating model that caused recurring pressure.

Neoground treated infrastructure, software, media, livestreaming, vendor relationships, internal workflows, and platform strategy as one system. This made it possible to identify which capabilities the company genuinely needed and which costs existed primarily because of historical packaging and dependency.

The resulting architecture did not reject external services. It used them deliberately. Commodity and specialist providers could supply infrastructure or media capability while the client retained control of product logic, data, workflows, and the ability to replace them later.

The company did not need cheaper versions of the same dependencies. It needed an operating model in which suppliers could change without the product changing with them.

Outcome

More than €300,000 in recurring costs removed — and a platform that became quieter as it grew.

The combined intervention removed more than €300,000 in annual software and technology costs. The result came from infrastructure rightsizing, operating-system and provider changes, new video and livestream delivery models, fewer external tools, platform consolidation, and the removal of unnecessary supplier overhead.

Reliability and performance improved at the same time. The modular infrastructure raised the operational ceiling, reduced peak-hour pressure, and created more credible redundancy. Modernized software and clearer service boundaries also reduced the recurring errors and bottlenecks that had consumed internal technology capacity.

Media operations became both less expensive and more capable. Full HD and 4K delivery, scalable paywalled livestreams, simpler transcoding, and platform-owned metadata replaced a costly and fragmented supplier structure.

The internal technology team spent less time reacting to failures, scaling limitations, and brittle integrations. Product and operational workflows became smoother, while leadership gained a platform direction that could govern future applications, features, providers, and integrations.

The most important change was that technology became less visible to the business. The platform ran with greater stability, absorbed continued growth, and no longer required constant commercial or technical intervention to justify its cost.

• More than €300,000 in annual software and technology costs removed.
• Approximately €100,000 in annual video-distribution costs eliminated.
• Approximately €80,000 in annual specialized livestreaming costs eliminated.
• Infrastructure, operating-system, provider, hardware, and subscription spending reduced further.
• Platform performance and peak-usage capacity increased.
• Real redundancy replaced reliance on one premium production server.
• Full HD and 4K video and livestream delivery became practical.
• Internal maintenance and recurring incident work fell substantially.
• Vendor dependence decreased across infrastructure, media, software, and operations.
• Leadership gained one coherent platform and technology direction.

Confidentiality note

Why this case remains anonymized.

The engagement involved confidential supplier contracts, infrastructure economics, platform architecture, operational weaknesses, internal workflows, and commercially sensitive technology decisions. The company, product, providers, and identifying implementation details are therefore not disclosed.

The stated annual savings and material cost categories reflect the documented engagement. The client did not commission or approve this public case study, and no testimonial or endorsement is implied.