Microshit astroturfer, please!
Try going to the SUSE and Redhat websites and looking - they are more expensive than equivalent Windows Server versions.
Yeah, as someone once said: "Do you think people would just go on the Internet and tell lies? Why would anyone do that?"
Your statement makes no fscking sense because Linux is a challenger not the king of the hill demanding tribute and every house's daughter for a test drive. So Linux packaging and support-providing outfits will be in the general ballpark of Microsoft pricing, thought a few hundred per year less.
According to Red Hat quite a few hundred per year less. I'm sure you can come up with better numbers, mister grassroots:
"Based on these numbers, the five-year cost of ownership for the proposed eight-server solution would be $47,960 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and $119,594 for Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2." etc. etc.
Pricing statements about "Linux is dear, oh dear" have a nasty tendency to come out of the Dungeon of Redmond exclusively and/or you can smell the money trail from a mile away (cough *Gartner* cough).
Course, getting the users to actually accept a system that looks dangerously hot-rodded at times is something else entirely.