[meterplech]

Love this idea. Some quick thoughts:

1) Tool to tool choices: Many migrations involve making decisions that are judgement calls because of service inconsistency (e.g the security roles in the two systems aren't exactly the same so you have to evaluate tradeoffs in how to handle in the new one). I bet many of these 'decision points' could be a defined for particular migrations, allowing the destination service to present to their customer options with tradeoffs, and then automate the migration from there. Even more valuable than the data flowing would be being the central tool that knows about these 'choice-points' in specific migrations.

2) White labeling: a lot of B2B SaaS companies would love to offer migration services. I would have paid $ per migration for something like this if it worked.

3) Services work as needed: I still think many migrations custom work is needed. I would lean into this actually if I were you. We would have loved a trusted 3rd party that just wanted to do migrations. It was hard to get incentives aligned, though, with many systems integrators because they obviously wanted a direct relationship with the customer & hoped to sell them more stuff afterwards. If B2B companies trusted this was your specific focus you could be a better 'full service' partner across both what can be automated and what can't be.