AI and accelerated-compute workloads have rewritten the assumptions colocation buyers used to rely on, particularly around power density, which now regularly exceeds what older facilities were designed to deliver.
There is a quiet shift happening in how organisations think about where their infrastructure lives. What was once a purely technical decision now sits squarely on the boardroom agenda, and for good reason.
The factors that actually move the needle
Headline pricing is the least reliable basis for comparison. Two facilities quoting similar rates can differ enormously once you account for power redundancy, cross-connect fees, remote-hands rates, and the small print around escalations and renewals.
Connectivity richness is frequently underweighted. A carrier-neutral facility with a dense ecosystem of networks and direct cloud on-ramps can save more over a contract term than a modest difference in the rack rate ever will.
A practical way to evaluate
Then shortlist on objective data and validate with your own eyes. Marketplace intelligence is excellent for narrowing the field quickly, but a site visit and a couple of reference calls will tell you things no datasheet can.
Start with requirements, not providers. Pin down your power per rack, total committed capacity, connectivity needs, and the compliance regimes you answer to. That single page of clarity will shape every conversation that follows.
Where buyers get it wrong
The most expensive mistake is optimising for the number everyone sees β the monthly rack rate β while ignoring the numbers nobody asks about until the invoice arrives: cross-connects, remote hands, power overage, and renewal escalators.
Treating tier level as a proxy for reliability is a common shortcut that backfires. Design tier describes redundancy on paper; actual uptime depends on maintenance discipline, staffing, and how the facility has behaved under real incidents.
What good looks like in practice
The best partnerships look less like a vendor relationship and more like a shared roadmap β regular capacity reviews, early visibility into expansion options, and a provider that flags risk before it becomes your problem.
The strongest operators are transparent by default β uptime history, incident reports, and maintenance schedules are available without a special request. That openness is itself a signal worth weighing.
A short checklist before you sign
- Request recent incident reports, not just a summary uptime percentage
- Leave headroom for growth, including higher-density racks down the line
- Write down your power, space, and connectivity needs before you talk to anyone
- Ask for real uptime history, not just the design tier
- Read the exit and renewal terms as carefully as the price
The bottom line
None of this is complicated, but it does reward diligence. The organisations that treat infrastructure procurement as a discipline rather than a purchase consistently end up with better facilities, better terms, and fewer surprises.
