Vendor Consolidation Campaign

Why this angle works: Seznam operates 30+ digital services — search, maps (Mapy.cz), email, news (Novinky.cz), video (Stream.cz), classifieds (Sbazar.cz), and more. Each service has evolved independently over 20+ years, likely with different infrastructure stacks, CDNs, security vendors, and monitoring tools. They have their own data centers but also use cloud for overflow. The complexity of managing 30+ service teams, each with preferred vendors, creates massive procurement overhead, security gaps, and cost duplication. However, Seznam is also engineering-proud — they build a lot in-house. The angle must respect their engineering culture while pointing out that non-differentiated infrastructure (CDN, DDoS, WAF, edge compute) is commodity work that distracts from their core mission.

Source: Seznam operates 30+ services (publicly listed on their corporate site). They operate their own data centers (Seznam.cz DC in Koněvova). Independent service teams typically choose their own infrastructure tools. Czech tech media has reported on their infrastructure investments.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Seznam has built something unique — a homegrown Czech internet ecosystem that competes with global giants. Your engineering team has built search, maps, email, video, and 25+ other services.

I'm curious about your infrastructure complexity at this scale. With 30+ service teams, each likely running their own CDN, security, and monitoring stack, how do you manage vendor relationships and avoid capability gaps?

Companies with similar scale (e.g., Shopify with 6M merchants, Spotify with dozens of services) have moved commodity infrastructure — CDN, DDoS, WAF, edge compute — to unified platforms. This doesn't replace your engineering excellence; it frees your teams to focus on search algorithms and user experience instead of negotiating CDN contracts.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Seznam thinks about infrastructure standardization?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Phrase operates four distinct products: Phrase TMS (translation management), Phrase Strings (developer-oriented localization), Phrase Studio (multimedia localization), and Phrase AI Agents (AI-powered translation). Each product likely has its own infrastructure stack, CDN configuration, security setup, and API gateway. As they scale enterprise sales, this fragmentation creates real problems: (1) engineering teams duplicate infrastructure work, (2) security policies are inconsistent across products, (3) enterprise clients see different performance/security per product, and (4) procurement can't leverage volume discounts. Consolidating edge infrastructure (CDN, WAF, API gateway, edge compute) across all four products would standardize the platform, reduce engineering overhead, and create a consistent enterprise experience.

Source: Phrase's product portfolio includes TMS, Strings, Studio, and AI Agents (publicly listed). Multi-product SaaS companies typically have 3-5x infrastructure vendor duplication per product line. Forrester Leader status means enterprise clients expect consistent platform performance.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Phrase has built an impressive multi-product platform — TMS, Strings, Studio, and now AI Agents. Each serves a different use case but shares the same enterprise clients.

I'm curious about your infrastructure architecture across these products. In most multi-product SaaS companies, each product team independently chooses CDN, security, and API gateway vendors. This creates three problems: (1) engineering teams duplicate infrastructure work, (2) security policies vary by product, and (3) enterprise clients experience inconsistent performance.

Companies like Shopify (6M merchants, dozens of services) unified edge infrastructure across all products — one CDN, one WAF, one API gateway. Engineering teams focus on product features; infrastructure is standardized and secure.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Phrase thinks about platform unification?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Celonis is a $13B+ German process mining unicorn that has grown through aggressive M&A — acquiring Make (Integromat) in 2020 and expanding their product portfolio across process mining, automation, and AI. Each acquisition brings its own infrastructure: different CDNs, security vendors, cloud providers, monitoring tools, and API gateways. Celonis serves Fortune 500 clients (Siemens, BMW, L'Oréal) who require consistent global performance and unified security compliance. Having acquired infrastructure on different vendors than their core Munich-based platform creates real problems: inconsistent latency for global clients, duplicated security policies, and fragmented vendor management. German enterprise procurement practices also favor vendor consolidation — having 15+ infrastructure vendors makes annual audits, contract negotiations, and compliance reporting exponentially more complex. With $2B+ in funding and global scale, Celonis has both the resources and the imperative to consolidate.

Source: Celonis valued at $13B+ with Fortune 500 clients. Acquired Make (Integromat) in 2020. German enterprise clients require consistent infrastructure and strict vendor management. Post-acquisition companies typically face 3-5x infrastructure duplication. German procurement favors vendor consolidation for compliance efficiency.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Celonis has built an incredible platform — and the Make acquisition created powerful synergies between process mining and automation.

I'm curious about your infrastructure post-M&A. Most acquisitions result in duplicated vendors: two CDNs, multiple security stacks, overlapping cloud contracts. For a company serving Fortune 500 clients, this creates inconsistent global performance and fragmented compliance reporting.

Companies like Salesforce and SAP consolidated acquired infrastructure within 2-3 years of major deals — unifying edge delivery, security, and API management. The result: lower costs, consistent client experience, and simpler audits.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Celonis approaches post-acquisition infrastructure rationalization?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Allegro acquired Mall Group in 2022, creating the largest e-commerce entity in Central Europe. The integration of Allegro.cz, Mall.cz, CZC.cz, and other properties means multiple e-commerce platforms, each with their own infrastructure stack, CDN, payment processors, and security vendors. Mall.cz historically ran on a different architecture than Allegro's native platform — likely different cloud providers, CDNs, and caching layers. Unifying these platforms creates massive consolidation opportunities: instead of maintaining separate vendors for each property, Allegro can standardize on a single edge platform for all CEE markets. This reduces procurement complexity, improves security consistency, and enables cross-market features (unified login, shared wishlists, cross-border shipping). The acquisition window (2-4 years post-deal) is the ideal time to consolidate — before technical debt calcifies and teams become entrenched in their preferred tools.

Source: Allegro acquired Mall Group in 2022 (CZK 12.5B). Mall Group operated Mall.cz, CZC.cz, and other properties on different infrastructure. Post-acquisition integration typically faces vendor duplication across acquired entities. E-commerce platforms commonly maintain separate CDN, security, and payment stacks per property.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

The Allegro-Mall Group acquisition created CEE's e-commerce leader — but it also created infrastructure complexity.

I'm curious about your integration strategy. Mall.cz, CZC.cz, and Allegro's native platform likely run on different CDN, security, and cloud stacks. Maintaining separate vendors for each property means duplicated costs, inconsistent security policies, and missed volume discounts.

Amazon acquired dozens of properties (Zappos, Whole Foods, Twitch) and consolidated edge infrastructure onto unified platforms within 2-3 years. The result: lower costs, faster cross-product features, and simpler vendor management.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Allegro thinks about infrastructure unification across its marketplace properties?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Delivery Hero operates food delivery platforms across 50+ countries, including Dáme jídlo in Czech Republic. Each market originally launched with local infrastructure decisions — different cloud providers, payment gateways, mapping APIs, and SMS services. As Delivery Hero matures from growth-at-all-costs to operational efficiency, vendor sprawl becomes a major pain point. The Czech operation likely uses: local CDN for image delivery, separate SMS provider for order notifications, distinct payment processor integrations, and local mapping APIs for delivery routing. Each vendor adds contract management overhead, security audit complexity, and integration maintenance. Delivery Hero's global scale (€3B+ revenue) means they should be getting enterprise volume discounts — but only if procurement is centralized. Consolidating edge infrastructure (image CDN, API security, DDoS protection) across all 50+ markets creates both cost savings and operational consistency. The current macro environment (pressure on unit economics) makes this a timely conversation.

Source: Delivery Hero operates in 50+ countries with €3B+ revenue. Multi-market food delivery platforms typically use local infrastructure vendors per market. Macro pressure on delivery economics has shifted focus from growth to unit economics and operational efficiency. Food delivery relies on image CDN (restaurant photos), SMS (order notifications), mapping (delivery routing), and payments.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Delivery Hero's scale is incredible — 50+ countries, billions in revenue, and dominant market positions across Europe.

I'm curious about your infrastructure complexity at this scale. Most multi-market delivery platforms started with local vendors per country — separate CDNs for restaurant images, different SMS providers, distinct payment integrations. This creates massive vendor sprawl: 50 contracts to manage, 50 security audits, 50 integration points to maintain.

As the industry shifts from growth-at-all-costs to unit economics, consolidating edge infrastructure across markets becomes a priority. Companies like Uber and Deliveroo unified CDN, security, and API management globally — cutting infrastructure costs by 30-40% while improving reliability.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Delivery Hero approaches multi-market infrastructure rationalization?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Slido was acquired by Cisco in 2020 and has been integrated into the Webex suite. Cisco is one of the world's largest technology companies with strict vendor management, security standards, and preferred supplier programs. Post-acquisition, Slido is likely under pressure to align with Cisco's infrastructure stack, security tools, and procurement processes. Cisco has existing relationships with major CDN, security, and cloud providers — relationships that come with enterprise pricing and support levels. Slido's pre-acquisition infrastructure choices (likely startup-friendly vendors) may not align with Cisco's enterprise vendor requirements. This creates both a mandate and an opportunity: replacing Slido's standalone vendors with Cisco-preferred alternatives reduces costs, simplifies compliance, and accelerates integration. The post-acquisition window (years 2-4) is when these consolidation decisions are made — before standalone contracts auto-renew and teams become too entrenched.

Source: Slido acquired by Cisco in 2020. Cisco has strict vendor management and preferred supplier programs. Enterprise acquisitions typically require infrastructure alignment within 2-4 years. Cisco's security and infrastructure portfolio includes enterprise-grade solutions that replace startup-tier vendors.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Slido's integration into Cisco Webex has been a success — but I imagine the infrastructure alignment is an ongoing journey.

Cisco has strict vendor management and preferred supplier programs. Post-acquisition companies typically face pressure to align infrastructure, security, and procurement with the parent company's standards. Pre-acquisition startup vendors often don't meet enterprise procurement requirements.

The post-acquisition window (years 2-4) is ideal for consolidation — budgets are allocated for integration, and teams expect change. Companies like WebEx (acquired by Cisco previously) and AppDynamics consolidated onto Cisco's infrastructure stack within 3 years.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Slido is approaching infrastructure alignment with Cisco?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Apify operates a complex platform with multiple distinct services: the Actor runtime (arbitrary code execution), Apify Store (marketplace), dataset storage, proxy infrastructure, and API endpoints. At Series B scale with 25K+ customers, each service area likely uses best-of-breed tools that have accumulated organically: separate CDN for Store assets, different storage for datasets, distinct security for proxy endpoints, and another vendor for API documentation. This fragmentation is natural for fast-growing startups — each team picks the best tool for their job. But at scale, it creates real problems: (1) security policies vary by service, creating compliance gaps; (2) engineering teams spend time integrating disparate tools instead of building platform features; (3) procurement can't leverage volume across services; and (4) incident response requires context-switching between multiple dashboards. As Apify scales toward enterprise customers, they need a unified, observable infrastructure stack that demonstrates operational maturity.

Source: Apify operates multi-service platform (Actors, Store, datasets, proxy, APIs) with 25K+ customers. Series B companies typically face infrastructure fragmentation as teams scale independently. Enterprise customers expect unified infrastructure and consistent security policies. Platform companies with 5+ services commonly use 10-15 different infrastructure vendors.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Apify's platform has grown remarkably — Actors, Store, datasets, proxies, and APIs serving 25K+ customers.

I'm curious about your infrastructure architecture across these services. Most platform companies at your stage have accumulated different vendors per service: one CDN for Store, another for datasets, separate security for proxies, and so on. This fragmentation is normal — but it becomes expensive as you scale.

Platform companies like Vercel and Twilio consolidated edge infrastructure across all services — one security layer, one delivery network, one API gateway. Engineering teams focus on product; operations become simpler and more secure.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Apify thinks about platform infrastructure unification?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Slevomat operates daily deals platforms across CZ, SK, and PL (as Experto), with a business model that depends on high-volume email campaigns, image-heavy deal pages, and mobile app APIs. Over years of operation, they've likely accumulated separate infrastructure vendors per market and per function: local email delivery services, different CDNs for deal images per country, separate payment processors, and distinct SMS providers for voucher delivery. The daily deals market has matured and faced margin pressure, making cost optimization a strategic priority. Slevomat's parent company (NIHN) has reportedly explored sale options, which typically triggers cost rationalization efforts. Consolidating vendors across the three markets creates immediate savings: instead of managing three email delivery contracts, three CDN relationships, and three security vendors, Slevomat could unify onto a single platform. This also enables cross-market features — unified user accounts, cross-border deals, and consistent mobile experiences.

Source: Slevomat operates across CZ/SK/PL under NIHN group. Daily deals market has matured with margin pressure. Multi-market operations typically accumulate local vendors per country. Corporate transitions (explored sale options) typically trigger infrastructure cost reviews.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Slevomat has built a strong daily deals presence across CZ, SK, and PL — millions of subscribers and thousands of merchant partners.

I'm thinking about your infrastructure across markets. Most multi-country platforms started with local vendors per market: different email delivery, separate CDNs, distinct payment processors. This creates complexity and missed volume discounts.

As the daily deals market matures and margin optimization becomes critical, consolidating edge infrastructure across markets creates immediate savings. It also enables cross-market features — unified accounts, cross-border deals, consistent mobile experiences.

Would you be open to a brief conversation about how Slevomat thinks about multi-market infrastructure consolidation?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Zoot.cz (now operating under Digital People) is a Czech fashion e-commerce company that has undergone significant transformation — restructuring, rebranding, and digital modernization. Companies in transition periods often accumulate vendor sprawl: legacy systems from the original platform, new tools added during digital transformation, point solutions for specific channels (mobile app, marketplace, social commerce), and overlapping vendors from organizational changes. Digital transformation projects frequently introduce new infrastructure without fully retiring old systems — resulting in parallel stacks that drain resources. For a fashion e-commerce company, this typically manifests as: multiple CDNs for image delivery (legacy + new), separate payment processors (old platform + new checkout), overlapping analytics tools, and fragmented security solutions. The restructuring period is actually an ideal time to consolidate — there's organizational appetite for change, cost scrutiny is high, and technical debt is being actively reviewed.

Source: Zoot.cz underwent restructuring and operates under Digital People. Fashion e-commerce companies in transformation typically face vendor sprawl from parallel legacy/modern systems. Digital transformation projects often add new tools without retiring old ones. Restructuring periods create organizational appetite for infrastructure consolidation.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Zoot's digital transformation and restructuring under Digital People has been a significant evolution — and transition periods create unique opportunities.

I'm curious about your infrastructure stack post-transformation. Most companies in similar transitions find they've accumulated parallel systems: legacy CDNs alongside new ones, old payment processors still running, overlapping analytics tools. Digital transformation adds capabilities but often doesn't fully retire what came before.

The good news: restructuring creates organizational appetite for rationalization. Companies like ASOS and Zalando used post-transformation periods to consolidate edge infrastructure — cutting vendor counts by 50% and reducing costs significantly.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Zoot is approaching post-transformation infrastructure consolidation?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Bonami operates a curated home decor marketplace across four countries (CZ, SK, PL, RO) with a visually-driven shopping experience that depends on fast image delivery, reliable checkout, and consistent mobile performance. As they've expanded from Czech Republic into Slovakia, Poland, and Romania, they've likely added local infrastructure per market: local CDNs for faster image delivery, regional payment processors, country-specific SMS providers, and local analytics tools. This market-by-market approach makes sense for launch speed but creates long-term complexity. Each new market adds 3-5 new vendor relationships, multiplying contract management, security audit, and integration maintenance overhead. For a company in home decor — where margins are thinner than electronics or fashion — infrastructure efficiency directly impacts profitability. Bonami's curated positioning also means site performance directly affects brand perception; slow-loading lifestyle images degrade the premium experience they're trying to create. Consolidating onto a unified edge platform across all four markets would improve performance consistency while reducing vendor overhead.

Source: Bonami operates curated home decor marketplace across CZ/SK/PL/RO. Multi-market expansion typically accumulates local infrastructure vendors per country. Home decor e-commerce operates on thinner margins than other categories. Visual shopping experience makes page performance critical to brand perception.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Bonami's expansion into four CEE markets is impressive — but multi-market growth often creates infrastructure complexity.

I'm curious about your vendor stack across CZ, SK, PL, and RO. Most companies expanding market-by-market accumulate local infrastructure: regional CDNs, local payment processors, country-specific tools. Each market adds vendor relationships to manage.

For curated home decor, page performance is brand-critical — slow lifestyle images degrade the premium experience. Companies like West Elm and MADE.com unified edge infrastructure across all markets: one fast global network, consistent checkout performance, and simpler vendor management.

Would you be open to a brief conversation about how Bonami thinks about multi-market infrastructure?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: Košík.cz operates a complex grocery delivery and logistics platform that combines real-time e-commerce (product catalog, pricing, promotions) with operational logistics (delivery routing, warehouse management, driver apps, inventory systems). This hybrid model means Košík runs two distinct technology stacks that must integrate seamlessly: a customer-facing e-commerce platform and a back-office logistics platform. Each stack likely has its own CDN, security tools, APIs, and monitoring systems. Grocery delivery also involves high-frequency, low-margin transactions — making infrastructure cost optimization critical to unit economics. As Košík scales and potentially expands to new cities or delivery models, maintaining separate infrastructure stacks for e-commerce and logistics becomes increasingly expensive and complex. Real-time inventory synchronization, dynamic pricing, and delivery ETA calculations require fast, reliable APIs — but if those APIs traverse multiple vendor networks, latency and reliability suffer. Consolidating edge infrastructure would improve the connection between e-commerce and logistics while reducing costs.

Source: Košík.cz operates grocery delivery with integrated e-commerce and logistics. Grocery delivery combines customer-facing web/mobile with warehouse management, routing, and driver apps. Unit economics in grocery delivery are tight, making infrastructure efficiency critical. Real-time operations require low-latency APIs between systems.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Košík has built something complex — a grocery platform that seamlessly connects online shopping with real-time delivery logistics.

I'm curious about your infrastructure architecture. Most hybrid e-commerce/logistics platforms end up with separate stacks: customer-facing CDN, separate security for warehouse systems, different APIs for driver apps and web checkout. This creates latency at the exact points where real-time synchronization matters most.

Grocery leaders like Instacart and Ocado unified edge infrastructure across customer and logistics platforms — improving inventory sync speed, reducing API latency, and cutting infrastructure costs by 25-30%.

Would you be open to a conversation about how Košík thinks about unifying e-commerce and logistics infrastructure?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: EPH (Energetický a průmyslový holding) is one of the largest energy groups in Europe, operating power plants, distribution networks, heat utilities, and trading platforms across CZ, SK, DE, IT, and UK. As an energy holding company, EPH's IT infrastructure spans multiple subsidiaries, each with historically independent technology decisions. A typical energy holding accumulates massive vendor sprawl: separate SCADA systems per plant, different network security vendors per country, multiple cloud providers, overlapping monitoring tools, and fragmented identity management. Energy infrastructure is also critical national infrastructure — making security consistency paramount. NÚKIB (Czech cyber security agency) has issued specific guidance for energy sector operators, including recommendations for unified security architecture. The complexity of managing 20+ infrastructure vendors across multiple countries, while maintaining compliance with energy sector regulations, creates enormous operational overhead. EPH's scale means they should be getting enterprise volume pricing — but only if procurement is centralized and standardized.

Source: EPH operates energy assets across CZ/SK/DE/IT/UK. Energy holding companies typically face massive vendor sprawl from independent subsidiary decisions. NÚKIB issues specific cybersecurity guidance for energy sector. Critical infrastructure requires consistent security architecture across all assets. Energy sector faces increasing cyber threats to OT/IT systems.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

EPH operates critical energy infrastructure across five countries — power generation, distribution, and trading platforms that millions depend on.

I'm thinking about your IT complexity. As a holding company with multiple subsidiaries, each likely made independent technology decisions over the years. The result: fragmented security architecture, overlapping vendors, and inconsistent protection across critical assets.

NÚKIB has specifically recommended unified security architecture for energy sector operators. Energy companies like E.ON and Enel have consolidated edge security and access management across all subsidiaries — improving both security consistency and operational efficiency.

Would you be open to a conversation about how EPH approaches infrastructure unification across its energy portfolio?

Best,
[Your name]

Why this angle works: BudgetBakers develops Wallet — a personal finance app with 5M+ downloads that connects to 15,000+ banks via open banking APIs. Their infrastructure must handle: secure bank API connections, user data storage, mobile app backends, web dashboards, and real-time transaction synchronization. As a fintech startup that has scaled to millions of users, BudgetBakers likely accumulated infrastructure incrementally: a CDN for the marketing site, another for app assets, a separate security vendor for the web dashboard, and cloud storage for user data. Fintech infrastructure is particularly complex because each component has strict compliance requirements: bank connections need specific security certifications, user data needs encryption and residency controls, and mobile apps need certificate pinning and secure update delivery. At 5M+ users and 15,000 bank connections, maintaining fragmented infrastructure becomes both expensive and risky — any security gap in one vendor creates compliance exposure across the entire platform. With open banking expanding across Europe, BudgetBakers needs a scalable, compliant infrastructure foundation.

Source: BudgetBakers' Wallet app has 5M+ downloads and 15,000+ bank connections. Fintech infrastructure requires strict compliance per component (bank APIs, user data, mobile). Open banking expansion (PSD2) creates scaling pressure. Startups at 5M+ users typically face infrastructure fragmentation from incremental growth.

Draft email:

Hi [Name],

Wallet's growth to 5M+ users and 15,000 bank connections is impressive — but that growth creates infrastructure complexity.

I'm thinking about your stack. Most fintechs at your stage accumulated infrastructure incrementally: one CDN for marketing, another for app assets, separate security for dashboards, and distinct storage for user data. Each component has different compliance requirements — and any gap creates exposure.

Fintechs like N26 and Revolut unified edge infrastructure early — one secure platform for web, mobile, and APIs with built-in compliance features. This reduced vendor overhead and created the audit-ready foundation needed for scaling across European markets.

Would you be open to a brief conversation about how BudgetBakers is building infrastructure for the next phase of growth?

Best,
[Your name]