Learning
Research
January 12, 2026
Wingu News
For CIOs, CFOs and executive teams across East Africa, infrastructure decisions have become strategic financial choices rather than purely technical ones. Yet many organisations continue to assume that keeping IT infrastructure in-house is the most economical option. Historically, owning servers implied greater control, lower costs and reduced reliance on third parties. As digital demand accelerates across Ethiopia, Djibouti and Tanzania, this assumption is increasingly misaligned with financial and operational reality.
Modern digital operations demand resilience, scalability and uptime that traditional server rooms struggle to deliver. When the full cost of ownership is examined including capital investment, energy consumption, staffing, risk exposure and opportunity cost, in-house infrastructure often proves more expensive over time than professional colocation. In infrastructure-constrained environments, colocation has evolved from a technical alternative into a strategic financial decision.
The Upfront Cost Fallacy of In-House Infrastructure
The perceived savings of avoiding monthly colocation fees often obscure the substantial capital required to build and operate a resilient data environment. Even modest facilities require purpose-built space, redundant power, backup generators, precision cooling, fire suppression and physical security.
Industry research indicates that building enterprise-grade data centres in African markets typically costs between USD 8 million and USD 15 million per megawatt of IT load capacity, depending on country conditions, infrastructure maturity and redundancy requirements, as highlighted in the Africa Data Center Construction Market Report 2025–2030 published by Research and Markets.
Critically, these figures cover only facility construction and core infrastructure such as power, cooling, physical structure and connectivity. They exclude IT hardware, networking equipment, software licensing and the operational platforms which can easily match or exceed the initial facility investment. Many organisations underestimate this second tier of cost, discovering the true scale only after capital is committed.
What begins as a contained project often becomes a rigid, long-term financial obligation. Colocation removes this upfront burden, converting capital expenditure into predictable operating costs while providing immediate access to enterprise-grade infrastructure.
Power and Cooling as Persistent Cost Drivers
Once operational, in-house data environments generate continuous and often volatile costs. Power and cooling remain the dominant contributors to ongoing operational expenditure globally, as consistently identified by Uptime Institute research.
In East Africa, these pressures are intensified by grid instability, fuel price volatility and high ambient temperatures. Ethiopia and parts of Tanzania require heavy investment in generators and fuel reserves to maintain uptime, while cooling inefficiencies accelerate equipment wear. Even in Djibouti, energy pricing and environmental factors place sustained pressure on operating costs.
These expenses compound over time and are frequently underestimated in financial models. Purpose-built colocation facilities achieve superior efficiency through industrial-scale cooling, optimised airflow and grid redundancy, creating a structural cost advantage that in-house environments struggle to match.
The Human Cost of Operating In-House Environments
Infrastructure costs represent only part of the financial picture. In-house environments also depend on skilled personnel capable of managing power systems, cooling performance, network resilience and physical security. Across East Africa, these skills remain scarce and highly competitive, driving up compensation expectations and increasing retention risk.
Lean IT teams often concentrate operational knowledge in a small number of individuals, increasing both financial exposure and operational fragility. By contrast, colocation providers distribute staffing costs across multiple tenants and embed specialised expertise into the service model. For organisations where data centre operations are not a core competency, this depth of expertise is difficult and costly to replicate internally.
The Economics of Shared Infrastructure
Colocation facilities are designed to absorb and optimise fixed infrastructure costs at scale. Power redundancy, cooling systems, physical security, monitoring and compliance frameworks are deployed once and shared across many tenants, dramatically improving cost efficiency.
Total cost of ownership (TCO) analyses from organisations such as the Uptime Institute and 451 Research consistently show that colocation outperforms enterprise-owned facilities over time when capital expenditure, energy, staffing and refresh cycles are considered together. Over a 5–10-year horizon, colocation commonly delivers lower overall cost alongside higher resilience and scalability.
For organisations with constrained capital or uncertain growth, this model aligns infrastructure spend with actual demand rather than locking resources into potentially underutilised assets.
Total Cost of Ownership Over Time
The financial advantage of colocation becomes most visible over time. In-house infrastructure combines high upfront capital expenditure with operating costs that typically rise due to energy volatility, staffing pressures, maintenance, compliance and technology refresh cycles.
Individually these costs may appear manageable; collectively they often exceed original projections. Colocation converts much of this uncertainty into predictable operating expenditure, simplifying forecasting and reducing exposure to volatility, an important advantage in fast-growing digital economies.
Regional Connectivity as a Financial Advantage
Regional connectivity dynamics further strengthen the colocation case in East Africa. Djibouti’s role as a landing point for multiple subsea cables has established it as a critical regional hub, while Tanzania continues to expand national and cross-border fibre infrastructure. Ethiopia’s gradual telecommunications liberalisation is also reshaping regional data flows.
Carrier-neutral colocation facilities located within these ecosystems provide access to multiple carriers and cloud on-ramps without the cost and complexity of managing individual agreements. The ability to add or switch carriers quickly improves negotiating leverage and reduces long-term connectivity risk.
Improved latency, resilience and performance also translate into better service delivery and reduced revenue risk, particularly for latency-sensitive applications such as financial services and real-time communications.
Scaling Without Capital Strain
Economic growth across East Africa is driving rapid demand for digital services, from fintech platforms to e-government and online education. Traditional server rooms are poorly suited to this pace of change. Scaling typically requires new equipment, power upgrades and physical construction, each introducing delays and additional capital expenditure.
Facilities designed for fixed capacity face significant challenges when demand exceeds initial assumptions. Power and cooling systems may require costly retrofits, and physical space constraints complicate lifecycle management. Upgrade timelines are measured in months, not weeks, and incremental costs often exceed original deployment costs.
Colocation environments allow organisations to scale incrementally, adding capacity as demand materialises rather than forecasting years in advance. This flexibility aligns infrastructure spending with revenue-generating demand, preventing capital from being tied up in unused capacity while ensuring growth is never constrained by infrastructure availability.
Security, Compliance and Risk Management
Security and compliance requirements continue to rise as regulatory expectations tighten and threats become more sophisticated. Implementing enterprise-grade security and maintaining certifications such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS and SOC 2 requires significant ongoing investment.
Colocation facilities embed these controls as standard features, spreading costs across tenants and reducing individual exposure. Dedicated security operations typically deliver stronger outcomes at lower per-tenant cost, providing measurable risk reduction.
Preserving Capital for Strategic Growth
One of the most overlooked aspects of infrastructure decisions is opportunity cost. Capital invested in buildings, generators and cooling systems cannot be deployed toward innovation, market expansion or customer experience.
Colocation preserves capital and executive focus for growth initiatives. The transition from capital expenditure to operating expenditure also improves financial flexibility as operating commitments can typically be adjusted far more easily than illiquid physical assets.
Conclusion
While the financial benefits of colocation are observable globally, they are particularly pronounced in Ethiopia, Djibouti and Tanzania due to a combination of infrastructure constraints, energy volatility, talent scarcity and rapidly evolving connectivity ecosystems. In these markets, the cost and risk of achieving enterprise-grade resilience in-house is disproportionately high relative to shared, professionally operated facilities.
This does not suggest that colocation is optimal in every scenario. Organisations with hyperscale requirements or significant sunk investment in modern facilities may still justify in-house operations. However, these cases are the exception rather than the rule.
For executive teams operating in East Africa’s evolving digital economies, reassessing infrastructure decisions through a full lifecycle financial lens is no longer optional. When this analysis is applied rigorously, colocation emerges not merely as a technical alternative, but as a strategic financial imperative aligned with resilience, flexibility and sustainable growth.
Learn more about us.
