Loading…
Loading…
A colocation or capacity contract arrives as an operating expense and gets coded to facilities. Here is what to look for before it becomes a restatement.
A property lease announces itself. A colocation agreement does not. It arrives as an operating expense, gets coded to facilities, and sits there. Then somebody asks whether you control an identified asset, and the answer turns out to be yes.
This article is about how to find those agreements before someone else does. Whether any particular arrangement contains a lease is a question for your accountants. Where the agreements are, what they say, and how you would ever know is a systems question, and that is the one worth solving first.
A lease register gets populated from the things everyone agrees are leases: offices, warehouses, vehicles, some equipment. Those arrive through a process. Somebody signs a property agreement and it lands on a finance desk because that is what has always happened.
Capacity and infrastructure agreements arrive through a different door. They are negotiated by engineering or operations, priced as a service, invoiced monthly, and coded to a cost centre. Nothing about that path passes a desk whose job is to ask whether the agreement conveys a right to control an identified asset.
The register is not wrong. It is complete with respect to the pipeline that feeds it, and that pipeline was never pointed at the right contracts.
Four features tend to travel together in agreements that turn out to contain a schedule.
A specific thing, not a general capability. "Rack 12 in suite 4" is different from "colocation services". A dedicated cage, a named circuit, a specific machine, a reserved line: these are identified. A pooled resource the supplier can substitute freely is a different question.
A commitment that does not flex. A fixed power draw, a minimum term, a take-or-pay volume. If you pay the same whether you use it or not, the agreement is behaving less like a service and more like an asset you are financing.
Control over how it is used. Who decides what runs on the hardware, who has physical access, who can reconfigure it. If the answer is you, that matters.
Hardware you specified. Equipment procured to your specification, or that you would take with you, or that the supplier could not readily redeploy. Substitution rights are the thing to read carefully.
In practice, in four places.
Colocation and data centre. The clearest case. Cage, cabinet, power commitment, cross-connects.
Reserved compute and capacity. Committed-use arrangements that name specific hardware, dedicated hosts, or a fixed reservation rather than an on-demand pool.
Managed hardware. Equipment placed on your site and operated by a supplier. Point-of-sale terminals, medical devices, industrial equipment, network appliances.
Logistics and warehousing. Dedicated space, a specific bay, a named trailer pool, a fixed number of racks.
None of these arrive labelled. All of them are findable if somebody looks.
You do not need a systems programme to do the first pass. You need a list of recurring supplier payments and an afternoon.
That exercise takes a day and it is the highest-yield day you will spend on this. It also tells you something more useful than the answer: it tells you how many agreements you were unable to assess from the documents you could find, which is usually the real finding.
Doing this once is a project. The reason it comes back is that the pipeline that missed these agreements the first time is still running.
Every new capacity agreement, every renewal that changes a commitment, every migration that moves workloads onto dedicated hardware: each one is another arrival through the door that does not pass a finance desk. Unless something changes about how those agreements are captured, the register drifts out of completeness again from the day you finish.
The durable version is a register that covers agreements rather than leases: everything with a recurring commitment, assessed once at signature, with the assessment and its basis recorded against the agreement. Most of them will not contain a schedule. The value is in being able to show that you looked.
Splitting an agreement into what is lease and what is service is harder than finding it, and it is where most of the actual work sits. A colocation contract bundles space, power, connectivity, remote hands, and monitoring. Some of that is a right to use an identified asset. Some of it is plainly a service.
That split drives two schedules, an allocation basis you need to be able to defend, and a set of numbers that has to reconcile back to one invoice. It is the subject of the next article.
Not sure where your process sits?
Five questions. Find the capacity and colocation agreements that carry a schedule you did not expect.