NoSaveNoPay vs House of Brick
House of Brick is a long-established Oracle licensing and database consultancy known for VMware-on-Oracle defence. NoSaveNoPay is a multi-vendor gainshare negotiation firm. Different scopes — sometimes complementary, sometimes alternatives.
An honest head-to-head between two firms that both come up in Oracle licensing searches. House of Brick is excellent at technical Oracle architecture defence. NoSaveNoPay is purpose-built for outcome-based commercial negotiation. This page helps you decide which engagement type fits your situation.
What House of Brick does — and where it earned its reputation
House of Brick Technologies is a Nebraska-headquartered consultancy founded in 1998, specialising in Oracle database administration, Oracle licensing, and Microsoft SQL Server. The firm is well-known in the Oracle licensing community for two specific positions: (1) Oracle databases can legally be run on VMware in many configurations without licensing every physical core of the underlying ESXi cluster; (2) Oracle's "soft partitioning" policy is a contractual position, not a licensing requirement set by the master agreement. House of Brick has defended these positions in numerous Oracle audits and built a strong track record around them.
Where House of Brick is genuinely strong: Oracle database architecture decisions where the licensing implication is the design constraint; technical defence in Oracle LMS audits where the audit finding rests on partitioning or virtualisation assumptions; and SQL Server licensing optimisation on virtualised infrastructure.
The scope question: House of Brick is technical-first. Their engagements are typically scoped as architecture or audit-defence projects on fixed-fee or hourly billing. If your need is a commercial negotiation — renewing an Oracle ULA, exiting a ULA, restructuring a support contract, negotiating Oracle Cloud commitments, or rationalising a licence estate to reduce ongoing support — that work sits adjacent to but outside House of Brick's primary positioning. NoSaveNoPay was built specifically for the commercial-negotiation outcome, with a fee structure (25% of verified savings) that bonds the advisor's compensation to that outcome.
Head-to-Head: The Criteria That Matter
Same comparison framework as every alternative we publish.
| Criterion | NoSaveNoPay | House of Brick |
|---|---|---|
| Fee structure | 25% of verified savings. Zero if savings are zero. | Fixed project fee or hourly rate. Billing independent of negotiation outcome. |
| Oracle specialisation depth | Former Oracle pricing and contracts leaders. Deep commercial focus on ULAs, support reduction, OCI commitments. | Technical Oracle DBA and architecture expertise. Strong on virtualisation and partitioning positions. |
| Audit defence positioning | Commercial defence — reduce the dollar value of audit findings via licence-position remediation and negotiation. | Technical defence — challenge audit findings on architectural and contractual grounds, particularly around VMware/partitioning. |
| VMware/non-cert hardware advisory | We can advise commercially but do not lead technical architecture defence in this domain. | Core specialty. Public advocacy and case experience. |
| Multi-vendor scope | 50+ vendors in one firm — coordinated Oracle/Microsoft/AWS/SAP negotiations. | Oracle and SQL Server primarily; not positioned for multi-vendor negotiation programmes. |
| Incentive alignment | 100% aligned — fee scales with savings. | Aligned with completing the technical scope. |
| Engagement type | Outcome-based negotiation; structured around a measurable savings target. | Technical advisory; structured around a defined deliverable (architecture, audit response, position paper). |
| Coverage beyond Oracle | Comprehensive — see services for the full vendor list. | Limited; primarily Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server. |
When You Probably Want Both
It is not always one-or-the-other. We have engaged on a number of Oracle programmes where House of Brick (or a similar Oracle-technical firm) was already engaged on the architecture or audit-defence side, and NoSaveNoPay led the commercial negotiation in parallel. The two engagements complement: their technical position becomes input to our commercial negotiation, and our commercial leverage creates room for their technical recommendations to be implemented.
A reasonable rule of thumb: if the licensing risk is fundamentally architectural (your VMware estate, your partitioning posture, your Oracle Cloud Infrastructure deployment design), you may need both a technical Oracle specialist and a commercial Oracle negotiator. If the licensing risk is fundamentally commercial (your ULA terms, your support uplift, your discount level, your renewal date pressure), the commercial negotiation is the larger lever.
Three Oracle Engagement Types Where Gainshare Outperforms
1. ULA exit and certification. The savings are quantifiable: Oracle's first-offer renewal or unsupported-cliff position, minus the negotiated exit terms. We have led ULA exits where the savings vs. Oracle's first offer exceeded 50% on the three-year forward commitment. A gainshare structure scales the advisor's fee directly with that outcome.
2. Oracle support cost reduction. Whether through repricing, terminations, or third-party support transition, support-cost negotiation has a clean baseline (current annual support charge) and a clean post-negotiation number. Twenty-five percent of the saving is the fair price for the outcome — not 100% of the saving from year one, which is what hourly billing can effectively cost when the engagement runs long.
3. Oracle Cloud (OCI) commitment negotiations. The Universal Credit and Bring-Your-Own-Licence-to-OCI structures are commercial decisions that map cleanly to gainshare. Our Oracle negotiation service covers all three of these workstreams in one engagement.
Oracle database architecture decisions on VMware or other non-certified infrastructure; technical Oracle audit defence rooted in partitioning or virtualisation positions; pure technical advisory where there is no commercial savings outcome to anchor a gainshare fee.
Oracle ULA renewals and exits; support cost reductions; OCI commitment structuring; multi-vendor programmes that include Oracle alongside Microsoft, SAP, AWS or ServiceNow; audit defence where the outcome is a quantified commercial settlement.
Choose by the type of risk you are managing
Choose House of Brick when your Oracle risk is architectural — VMware deployment posture, partitioning interpretation, SQL Server licensing on virtualised infrastructure. Choose NoSaveNoPay when your Oracle risk is commercial — ULA renewal, support cost, audit settlement value, OCI commitment, or any other contract term where the outcome is a measurable dollar reduction. For complex programmes, run them in parallel — and on the first call we will tell you honestly whether your situation benefits from both, one, or neither.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is House of Brick an Oracle reseller?
No. House of Brick is an independent Oracle licensing and database consultancy. They are well known for advocating that Oracle databases can be run on VMware and non-Oracle-certified hardware in many configurations, despite Oracle's commercial position. They provide audit defence, licensing optimisation, and database architecture services on a fixed-fee or time-and-materials basis.
How does House of Brick price its services?
House of Brick typically prices on a fixed project basis or time-and-materials hourly rate, depending on engagement scope. Audit defence engagements, licensing reviews, and architecture assessments are scoped as discrete deliverables with milestone billing — independent of the commercial outcome of any subsequent Oracle negotiation.
What does NoSaveNoPay do differently for Oracle clients?
NoSaveNoPay charges 25% of verified savings achieved on the Oracle engagement — including ULA renegotiation, audit settlement reduction, support cost reduction, and licence position rationalisation. If verified savings are zero, the fee is zero. The team includes former Oracle pricing and contracts executives. See our Oracle negotiation service for the full scope.
Can both firms help with an Oracle audit?
Yes. Both firms have experienced Oracle audit defence practitioners. House of Brick is particularly known for technical defence around VMware-based licensing positions. NoSaveNoPay's audit defence engagements are gainshare-based — the fee is a percentage of the documented reduction in Oracle's initial audit findings.
Which firm covers Microsoft, SAP and AWS?
When does House of Brick beat gainshare?
When the engagement is purely technical — for example, an Oracle database architecture review on VMware where there is no specific commercial outcome being targeted, or a deep technical audit defence where the defensible licensing position is the deliverable rather than a quantified saving.
Does NoSaveNoPay handle Oracle ULA exits?
Yes. ULA exit and certification is one of our highest-leverage Oracle engagement types. The savings calculation is well-defined (gap between Oracle's first-offer renewal terms and the negotiated exit position) which makes it well-suited to a gainshare structure.
Next steps
- If you have an Oracle audit, renewal, or ULA decision in the next 120 days: request a free estimate. We will tell you on the first 30-minute call whether the savings opportunity supports a gainshare engagement.
- If you want context first: read the Oracle negotiation service page, the 2026 Oracle licence review, or compare other alternatives — vs UpperEdge, vs NPI, vs in-house procurement.
Last reviewed 2026-05-18 by Fredrik Filipsson. Comparison reflects publicly available information about House of Brick Technologies as of publication date. NoSaveNoPay is not affiliated with House of Brick.