The first four papers assumed the engineering transformation will happen. This one asks whether organisations can afford it. The seat-based licensing model that finance departments have used for thirty years is decoration if you ignore the fuel: tokens. The paper exposes the "seat trap" — treating Cursor or Copilot as $20-per-developer SaaS while ignoring inference costs that arrive months later as a shock — and argues that the ROI of agentic engineering is real, but only for organisations that deliberately redesign their budgeting frameworks around variable computational cost.
This site uses simple analytics for the author's own use — to understand how readers engage with the series. Nothing is sold or shared with third parties.