Of course. But that's the point: without other data, the only metric can be revenue. And there are tons of ways for it to be wrong in either direction, so claimed costs are (almost?) always fantasy.
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Radoslaw Skorupka Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 9:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Cost of an outage W dniu 03.03.2025 o 15:27, Phil Smith III pisze: [...] > Similarly, Allan Staller wrote, in part: >> At a relatively small MF shop I used to work at, the cost of downtime >> was pegged at 100K/Hour. > Again, could be true (though that seems to make the company's revenue $876M, > which doesn't sound like a small shop) but where did that number come from? Good calculation, wrong assumption. Indeed, the cost of outage need not to be the revenue made during online processing. In other words the company can earn much less than they loss when unexpected outage occurs. And of course the cost of outage is provided in $$$/s while the real cost per time is rarely linear. There are cases where <1 minute outage would not cause any measurable costs, while 5 minutes causes big problems, same problems for 10 minutes, but 30m and more means even worse problems, but there is no difference between 2 and 4 hours, etc. That include reputation also, which is hardly measurable. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
