NoSaveNoPay vs UpperEdge
The 60-second version: UpperEdge is a fixed-fee software negotiation advisor founded 2008. NoSaveNoPay is a 25% gainshare negotiation firm. Same buyers, same vendors, different risk allocation.
An honest head-to-head between two software negotiation advisories on opposite ends of the fee-structure spectrum. UpperEdge is a credible firm with deep ERP credentials — this page exists because the buying question is rarely "are they good?" but rather "which fee model fits this engagement?"
What UpperEdge is — and where it earned its reputation
UpperEdge is a Boston-headquartered software negotiation advisory founded in 2008, with notable depth in SAP, Oracle and Salesforce engagements. The firm operates primarily on a fixed-fee or hourly model, with engagement fees commonly ranging from $40,000 for a focused vendor renewal to $200,000+ for multi-vendor strategic sourcing programmes. UpperEdge publishes useful content, employs former vendor executives, and is well-known to procurement teams at large U.S. enterprises.
Where UpperEdge is genuinely strong: longitudinal advisory work where a fixed retainer maps cleanly to a procurement budget line; SAP S/4HANA migration commercial planning where the negotiation arc spans 12–18 months; and governance work for procurement organisations that need an external benchmark voice in steering committee meetings.
The structural friction: a fixed fee is paid whether savings materialise or not. An advisor whose compensation is decoupled from the savings outcome has no economic reason to push the vendor to the absolute floor — only to deliver the agreed scope. This is not a critique of UpperEdge specifically; it is a property of every fixed-fee model. A $120,000 flat-fee Oracle negotiation that delivers $400,000 of savings looks like a 3.3× return on paper. A gainshare-aligned advisor would have pushed for $2.0M because every additional dollar of savings compounds their own fee.
Head-to-Head: Every Criterion That Matters
The same eight criteria we use in every comparison we publish. No cherry-picking.
| Criterion | NoSaveNoPay | UpperEdge |
|---|---|---|
| Fee structure | 25% of verified savings. Zero if savings are zero. No retainer, no hourly billing. | Fixed-fee or hourly. Typical engagements $40k–$200k per vendor, billed on milestones regardless of outcome. |
| Incentive alignment | 100% aligned — fee scales linearly with savings delivered. | Aligned with completing the scope. Saving more than the target costs the advisor more time at flat fee. |
| Minimum engagement size | No minimum. We engage on any contract where our 25% share exceeds our cost-to-serve. | Typically $5M+ vendor spend to justify the flat-fee structure. |
| Payment timing | After savings are verified, paid from the savings themselves. | Milestone-based during engagement, often before final savings are measured. |
| Vendor coverage | 50+ vendors including AWS EDP, Google Cloud, Broadcom/VMware. Strong audit defence practice. | Deep on SAP, Oracle, Salesforce, ServiceNow. Less depth in hyperscaler cloud negotiation. |
| Risk allocation | 100% on the advisor. If we under-deliver against the baseline, the fee is zero. | 100% on the buyer. Fee is owed whether the negotiation delivers projected savings or not. |
| Multi-year compounding | Year-2 and year-3 price holds are part of the gainshare calculation. We push hard on back-year protection. | Engagement typically scopes year-1 outcome. Back-year work usually requires a change order. |
| Independence from vendors | 100% independent. No reseller relationships, no partner programmes, no vendor rebates. | 100% independent. No vendor reselling. |
The Three Scenarios Where Choosing the Wrong Model Hurts Most
1. Large ERP renewals where savings are uncertain
Consider an SAP RISE migration for a $14M S/4HANA estate. A fixed-fee advisor at $150,000 has a defined scope. If the negotiation lands a 12% reduction on a $42M three-year commitment ($5.0M saved), the advisor's effective rate is 3% of savings — cheap. If the negotiation lands a 2% reduction ($840k saved), the advisor's effective rate is 18% — expensive. The buyer cannot know which scenario will materialise before signing the SOW. Gainshare pricing is invariant to the outcome: 25% of $5.0M is $1.25M, 25% of $840k is $210k. The buyer pays exactly in proportion to value received.
2. Concentrated single-vendor exposure with audit risk
If the vendor is Oracle or IBM and there is real audit exposure (ULA, ILMT, PVU sub-capacity), the negotiation is partially defensive. A fixed-fee model meters the advisor's time. A gainshare audit defence engagement ties the advisor's compensation to the size of the audit settlement reduction — which is the actual measure of value created. For exposed buyers, that alignment matters more than fee predictability.
3. Cloud commitment negotiations where workload trajectory is uncertain
AWS EDP, Azure MCA-E and Google Cloud commitment structures require multi-year decisions about workload growth that may or may not materialise. A fixed-fee advisor delivers a recommendation. A gainshare advisor lives with that recommendation: if we propose a $25M EDP that turns out to be $8M over-committed in year two, our gainshare on the under-spend is recaptured in the engagement's true-up clause. The structure forces conservative commitment modelling.
Procurement organisations that cannot get internal approval for contingent fee structures; multi-year retainer engagements where capacity is the deliverable; SAP-heavy estates where UpperEdge's accumulated SAP commercial intelligence is the value being purchased.
Any single-vendor negotiation with a clear savings target and verifiable baseline; cloud commitment structures (AWS EDP, Azure, GCP); audit defence; mid-market and growth-stage buyers below UpperEdge's typical engagement minimum.
When to choose each
Choose UpperEdge when your finance function will not approve contingent compensation, when you need a multi-year advisory retainer for capacity reasons, or when the engagement is primarily SAP S/4HANA programme advisory. Choose NoSaveNoPay when the engagement has a clear measurable savings target, when you want the advisor's incentive bonded to your outcome, or when the contract is in cloud, audit, or non-ERP territory. For most enterprise buyers most of the time, gainshare is the lower-risk choice — but "most" is not "all", and we will tell you on the first call if we think your situation is one of the exceptions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is UpperEdge a good alternative to NoSaveNoPay?
UpperEdge is a credible fixed-fee software negotiation advisory founded in 2008. They charge flat retainers or project-based fees regardless of outcome. NoSaveNoPay charges 25% of verified savings only — if savings are zero, the fee is zero. Both firms cover similar vendors. The structural difference is risk allocation: UpperEdge transfers fee risk to the buyer; NoSaveNoPay keeps the risk on the advisor.
How does UpperEdge charge for software negotiation?
UpperEdge typically prices on a fixed-fee or time-and-materials basis, with engagement fees commonly ranging from $40,000 to $200,000 per vendor depending on scope and complexity. Fees are invoiced on milestones during the engagement, regardless of whether the negotiation produces the projected savings.
What does NoSaveNoPay charge?
NoSaveNoPay charges 25% of verified contract savings against a documented pre-engagement baseline. If verified savings are zero, the fee is zero. There is no retainer, no hourly billing, and no milestone invoicing. The engagement letter defines baseline methodology before work begins — see pricing for a worked example.
Which vendors does each firm cover?
When does fixed-fee advisory beat gainshare?
Fixed-fee makes sense when a procurement organisation cannot get internal approval for contingent compensation, when the scope is purely advisory with no clear savings target (governance review, contract structure documentation), or when the buyer wants to engage an advisor as a long-term retainer for capacity reasons rather than for a single negotiation outcome.
Can I use both firms?
Yes, though it is uncommon. Some enterprises engage a fixed-fee advisor for governance and benchmark documentation, then engage a gainshare partner for active negotiation execution. The two models address different needs: capacity advisory vs. outcome-based negotiation.
Does NoSaveNoPay sell to AWS, Oracle or Microsoft?
No. NoSaveNoPay is 100% independent: no reseller relationships, no vendor partnerships, no rebates or referral fees from any software or cloud provider. Our team includes former vendor executives but the firm sells only buyer-side advisory.
Two paths, both zero-risk
- If you have a renewal in the next 120 days: request a free estimate — 30-minute call, we tell you whether we think savings are achievable, no obligation either way.
- If you are earlier in the cycle: read the vendor-specific playbooks — Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, Salesforce, ServiceNow — or browse other comparisons and case studies.
Last reviewed 2026-05-18 by Fredrik Filipsson. Comparison reflects publicly available information about UpperEdge as of publication date. NoSaveNoPay is not affiliated with UpperEdge.