Other things to consider are:
Reduced Square Footage (We are consolidating from 300 SQ Ft. down to 6 SQ Ft.
Reduction of A/C and Power Requirement. This is also a major benefit of Virtualization and consolidation.
Looking back through this thread, I think I muddied the waters, which is where mitchell appears to have gotten off course and why most of us couldn't understand why he didn't see the profit margin.
I say appears, because he is correct, but for the pc implementation, and I think he missed that we're looking at server and pc migrations research wise.
Server wise, it's hard to argue with ESX. PC wise, it's easy. ESX doesn't scale pc images well, because a pc image has to be very fluid, whereas servers run WORK, not a pretty gui.
So mitchell, apologies if I worded the question the way I did.
Let me give you a for instance. I am assuming that
energy costs alone will balance out the ESX licenses.
What do we have left?
Increased time on the UPS.
Redundancy, and ease of maintenance.
Less need to build a new data center every 4 years or
Less switch ports=less switches(expensive)
Easy upgrades to servers, when you need more
horsepower, simply give it more. When you upgrade
physical servers, you no longer have to rebuild your
server and apps for the new architecture.
And those are just a few positives.
How about server provisioning. Figure out how long it takes to complete 1 server, from approval to ordering to receiving/racking, installing, ready for production. The simple math is time to build a physical vs. virtual.
If you get paid the equivalent of $50/hr and it takes 16 hours to build a physical out vs. 4 hours for a virtual, thats $600 you save in time not wasted on a physical box. Soft cost, yes, but these things should be considered as well.
Also I didn't see it, but I may have missed it, what about support costs? That HP/Dell/IBM/whomever support doesnt run cheap typically at $2000 for 3 years or what have you. Reduce 100 servers and that could be $200,000.