Software vendor audits are not compliance exercises — they are revenue generation programmes. Oracle's LMS team, SAP's LAM, and IBM's IASP have one objective: extract maximum true-up payment. We've been on their side of the table. We know every tactic they use.
Under active audit? Contact us immediately. Audit response windows are short — typically 30 days — and early intervention dramatically improves your outcome. Your first call with us is free and confidential.
Confidential. Free initial consultation. We respond within 15 minutes.
The Audit Playbook
Oracle's LMS audit programme generates billions in annual revenue — revenue that has nothing to do with new licences or product improvements. SAP's LAM and IBM's IASP follow the same model. Here is how they operate.
Audits are most frequently initiated during contract renewal negotiations, when you are evaluating competitive alternatives, or after your business has grown through acquisition. The timing is never random.
Vendors apply the most aggressive interpretation of licence metrics. Oracle's processor counting rules for virtualised environments are a primary source of over-stated demands — often counting physical hosts instead of virtual cores.
A 30-day audit response window gives you almost no time to gather documentation, analyse your position, and formulate a response. This compression is intentional — it forces concessions under pressure.
Auditors frequently attempt to extend the scope of their review beyond what your licence agreement permits — into subsidiaries, historical periods, or product modules not covered by the audit right.
Vendors present inflated initial true-up demands and then offer a "discounted settlement" tied to purchasing additional licences or moving to a cloud subscription. The settlement looks attractive compared to the inflated demand — but it's still a revenue extraction exercise.
Unresolved audit findings are used as leverage in contract renewal negotiations. You cannot negotiate from strength when you have an open compliance liability. Vendors know this and exploit it.
Our Approach
We intervene between you and the vendor's audit team. You deal with us — we deal with them. Our four-phase approach consistently reduces true-up demands and eliminates false compliance claims.
We review your licence agreement to determine the scope of the vendor's audit rights. We identify any procedural deficiencies in the notice itself, and advise on your legal obligations vs. cooperative options.
Before any data is submitted to the vendor, we establish your true compliance position using correct metric application. We identify your actual exposure — not the vendor's inflated version.
We challenge the vendor's methodology directly — in writing and in negotiation sessions. We dispute inflated processor counts, incorrect metric applications, and scope overreach with documented evidence.
We negotiate the final settlement position and ensure any agreement protects you from future audit risk in the same areas. Post-audit, we implement licence optimization to prevent recurrence.
Audit Defense Questions
Do not respond to the vendor directly before taking expert advice. Audit notices typically have 30-day response windows, but nothing requires you to cooperate immediately on the vendor's terms. Contact us as soon as possible — the earlier we get involved, the better your negotiating position. Read more about how we handle Oracle support clients under audit pressure.
It depends on your licence agreement. Most Oracle agreements include an audit right, but this right is subject to specific conditions — including advance notice periods, audit frequency limits, and scope restrictions. Vendors frequently exceed their contractual audit rights. We review your agreement to identify where their request exceeds what they're actually entitled to.
In our experience, initial Oracle true-up demands are overstated by 30–70% in the majority of cases. SAP and IBM audits follow similar patterns. Vendors use aggressive counting methodologies and assume maximum deployment scenarios. Our role is to apply the correct methodology and challenge every inflated assumption with documented evidence.
Yes. We can engage at any stage — even if you've already submitted initial data to the vendor. Our first step is always to assess what has been disclosed and what options remain. Contact us regardless of audit stage.
No. Audits are triggered by licence compliance, not support contracts. Switching to GoVendorFree third-party support does not change your licence compliance position. We advise all support transition clients on their licence posture before cutover to ensure they are clean before leaving vendor support.
Related Services