You're scaling on AWS and facing a critical decision: Should you invest in AWS Enterprise Support with its hefty price tag, or work with an AWS Partner instead?
This question sparked a candid discussion on Reddit where AWS practitioners shared their unfiltered experiences. The responses reveal an uncomfortable truth: these two options serve fundamentally different purposes, and choosing the wrong one can cost you both money and operational headaches.
Let's break down what each option actually delivers, based on real experiences from the trenches.
The Core Difference: They're Not Mutually Exclusive
The most important insight from the Reddit discussion came from a former AWS TAM:
"The two are not mutually exclusive. They serve different purposes. Enterprise Support is just that, a support tier... Partners come in many varieties. Most are consultants for projects."
Here's the fundamental distinction:
- Enterprise Support = Strategic advisory, escalation paths, 24/7 premium support (costs 10% of monthly spend, $15K minimum)
- AWS Partners = Hands-on implementation, operational management, project delivery
As the former TAM explained: "AWS Enterprise Support will never touch resources inside your account. Often you provide credentials to partners to execute on your behalf inside your AWS environment."
This is critical: Partners actually build your infrastructure; TAMs provide guidance and escalations.
The Reality of Working with TAMs
The Reddit discussion revealed mixed feelings about TAM value. The former TAM explained their actual role:
"I was a TAM (few years back), and yes, create a ticket is a mechanism for support... The day-to-day things that you burden the TAM with take them away from the bigger strategic things. It's your choice how to engage your TAM."
TAMs are strategic advisors, not break-fix engineers. As another user clarified: "TAMs don't work tickets and they don't do break-fix. They're there to help you figure out how to execute your vision for the next 6/12/18/24 months, not why you're getting a random IAM error."
However, TAM quality varies significantly. One practitioner bluntly stated:
"It's a 50/50 shot. Nearly every conversation can end up telling you to post a ticket, it gets old really fast."
Another added:
"Enterprise Support is mostly a rip off, TAMs are relatively low value... The most value a TAM provides is being able to bug internal teams at AWS to fix fuckups that shouldn't be happening in the first place."
The harsh truth: You might pay $180K-$600K annually and still feel like you're not getting strategic value.
The former TAM's advice: "Many customers do not make the most of this because they do not engage their TAM proactively. You can get a lot from it, but you do need to treat your TAM as a partner for supporting your environment, not a consultant."
The Partner Experience: Good, Bad, and Ugly
Partners come in many forms—consulting firms, managed service providers, and resellers. The Reddit discussion revealed strong opinions on all types.
The Good
One practitioner who was initially skeptical changed their view:
"Over the past two years I have started to think [partners] actually provide an important service. Specifically they are your advocate and they know how to navigate AWS back channels to get things done. Many partners have multiple former AWS employees on staff and they know how to push the right buttons."
Partners provide hands-on implementation—they actually build your infrastructure, deploy applications, and handle day-to-day operations. For well-defined projects like migrations or Landing Zone setup, they often cost less than hiring in-house expertise.
The Bad
The original poster shared a frustrating experience:
"We were 'selected' for a review with a partner and from what I have seen so far were being provided a lot of slop copy and paste best practice setups not in our best interest... in reality on paper what is being suggested will push our environment costs tenfold. There's also always a push from all partners to 'deploy deploy deploy and we need x permissions'. Asking for access to our organization and management accounts before finalizing an architecture diagram to be able to deploy stuff is beyond me."
The concern about incentives is real. As one user noted:
"AWS partners are incentivised by AWS for generating demand for AWS. So they profit from your AWS bill as well."
Key advice: "You should use your management account only for paying bills and other administrative stuff. Avoid giving access to the management account."
The Ugly: Partner-Led Support
Some partners offer "enterprise support" at steep discounts. One user warned:
"Be careful about partners offering their own 'enterprise support' for way cheaper than AWS. Presidio does this and it's terrible. Much slower, way less knowledge depth, and you can't open a ticket with AWS directly."
How Partner-Led Support works: AWS implements SCPs preventing you from opening tickets directly. All requests go through the partner first. AWS grades partners on "case quality," incentivizing them NOT to escalate.
However, another practitioner countered:
"Overall I think it's a great program as you get the knowledge and expertise of a qualified AWS partner (and if they are big enough they have a lot of pull with AWS) and enterprise support for much less but the key is you have to work with a good partner."
The Managed Services Push
Both TAMs and partners will push you toward AWS managed services. The former TAM explained why:
"TAMs will push for managed services because the vast majority of customers are actually terrible at running databases, or Spark clusters, or building out a storage solution by hand."
Sometimes this advice is sound. But one practitioner shared a cautionary tale about replacing Nginx with ALB:
"One of my clients replaced Nginx with ALB (AWS enterprise support convinced them). They have AWS Landing Zone with centralized Network management... The problem is, you cannot attach a target group for ECS to an ALB running in a different account."
The result? A unnecessarily complex architecture: DNS → Network account ALB → Workload account NLB → Workload account ALB → ECS.
The simple solution? Keep using Nginx.
As another user warned: "Managed services have a lot of hidden limitations and you have to do a lot of workaround to get over this. They won't tell you that upfront."
Before committing to managed services, ask:
- What are the architectural constraints?
- How does this work in a multi-account environment?
- What's the cost comparison over 1-3 years?
- What control am I giving up?
So Which One Do You Need?
Based on the Reddit discussion, here's the practical guidance:
You Probably Need Enterprise Support If:
- Your AWS spend exceeds $150K/month (making the $15K minimum reasonable)
- You have mission-critical production workloads where 15-minute response times matter
- You need strategic guidance on multi-year AWS roadmaps
- You want internal AWS escalation paths when support tickets stall
You Probably Need Partners If:
- You lack in-house AWS expertise for implementation
- You need hands-on help with specific projects (migration, security hardening, cost optimization)
- You want someone to actually build and deploy your infrastructure
- You need ongoing operational management of your AWS environment
You Might Need Both If:
- You have complex AWS environments requiring both strategic guidance and hands-on management
- Your budget supports both investments (typically $300K+ monthly AWS spend)
- You want partners doing the work with Enterprise Support providing escalation paths
You Might Need Neither If:
- You have a small AWS footprint (<$50K/month spend)
- You have strong in-house AWS expertise
- Business Support meets your tactical needs
Red Flags to Watch For
Based on the discussion, avoid these warning signs:
For Partners:
- Requesting management account access before finalizing architecture
- "Best practice" recommendations without cost analysis
- Vague deliverables and unclear pricing
- Resistance to knowledge transfer
For TAMs:
- Constantly deflecting to support tickets without strategic input
- Generic recommendations without understanding your context
- No proactive outreach or engagement
The Bottom Line
As the former TAM explained in the Reddit thread: Enterprise Support and Partners serve different purposes. They're not alternatives—they're complementary.
Enterprise Support provides strategic advisory, escalation paths, and 24/7 premium support. But TAM quality varies significantly, and you might pay $180K-$600K annually without getting strategic value.
Partners provide hands-on implementation and operational management. But quality varies dramatically, and incentive misalignment is real—they profit from increased AWS spend.
The key insight from the discussion: Don't buy either just because AWS recommends it. Buy Enterprise Support when you genuinely need strategic guidance and internal escalation paths. Hire Partners when you need hands-on implementation expertise.
And remember: Whether you choose Enterprise Support, Partners, or both, manage the relationships actively. As multiple practitioners noted, quality varies dramatically. You'll only get value if you're engaged, asking tough questions, and holding providers accountable.
If you're looking for hands-on AWS expertise, explore our AWS consulting services including Landing Zone setup, security reviews, and cost optimization. We focus on practical implementation that empowers your team, not dependency.
For more context on AWS support options, read our detailed comparison of AWS Professional Services vs APN Partners to understand the full landscape of AWS expertise available to you.
