Most colocation migrations fail on sequencing, not technology — moving the wrong workload first is a far more common cause of downtime than any hardware issue.
Behind every application your customers touch sits a physical building full of power, cooling, and fibre. The choices made about that building quietly shape performance, cost, and risk.
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.
Model the whole cost, not the monthly line. Setup fees, cross-connects, bandwidth, growth headroom, and exit terms all belong in the comparison. The cheapest rack rate is rarely the cheapest deployment.
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.
Why it matters now
Power has overtaken floor space as the binding constraint in most primary markets. Vacancy rates have fallen to record lows, and the practical effect is that capacity — particularly high-density capacity — increasingly needs to be reserved well ahead of when you actually need it.
The market has split in two. Standard enterprise workloads still run comfortably at three to five kilowatts a rack, while accelerated-compute deployments are pushing twenty, fifty, even a hundred kilowatts. Those two worlds are priced and provisioned very differently, and conflating them is a common and expensive mistake.
Where buyers get it wrong
The most expensive mistake is optimising for the number everyone sees — the monthly rack rate — 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.
A short checklist before you sign
- Map the network ecosystem: carriers, internet exchanges, and cloud on-ramps
- Clarify remote-hands response times and what is included versus billed separately
- Write down your power, space, and connectivity needs before you talk to anyone
- Confirm the certifications your industry and customers actually require
- Leave headroom for growth, including higher-density racks down the line
The bottom line
There is no shortcut that replaces doing the homework, but there is a real payoff for doing it well: fewer surprises, better terms, and a partner that fits for the long run.