That the really big guys, who actually have vast amounts of *meaningful* data (not just packratting) are 100% on-prem?
Most outfits that think they are in the "big data league" really are not. Many are just unaware of the real meaning of "big", or simply hold onto data in hot storage that is at most of historical interest - not that it stops them from feeding irrelevant data to models to train them.
Yeah, I'm a skeptic of clouds, cold-calling stockbrokers (well, all cold-callers, actually - not one has ever been for my benefit in dunno, 6 decades?).
No one cares about your stuff like you do. The myth is that some cloud provider has more expertise per buck than a local highly qualified sysadmin and programmer. It's a myth. When they fall over, you wind up hiring such to fix it, since their underpaid largely H1B staff can't and don't really care.
And of course, it's an emergency, and you have to pay at least triple for these high skilled consultants to not only learn all your operation from scratch, but then fix the immediate issue, usually then letting them go rather than fixing the causes of that issue.
Your own guys care. Yes, it's hard to hire and retain good ones - and even know the difference. You think that's easier for a big cloud outfit where on top of the other insults, you're just one of a crowd in cubicles? Do the best tolerate that treatment? Do you really think cloud providers have better line-level talent? I have this spare bridge...Call Oracle for details.
But for the quarter that the cloud didn't fail, some MBA gets a bigger bonus, for saving money - in the short term. Yeah, that thinking is how all great, highly profitable outfits came to be. Oh, wait...