It always amazes me that people "lose money" over a system that - for way less than even a day's outage money - could be doubled in resiliency by putting some inactive server in a disparate cloud, or on their own site, or whatever.
Even a VM replica, syncing every 15 minutes or so but otherwise idle, could have been spun up quickly even if it wasn't the fastest server / connection that it was sitting on.
I did a calculation once - my employer's entire systems could be stored and booted up on a single laptop. Not claiming it would be "fast", but it would be up and you could carry on business in a reasonable manner.
Literally, for the cost of a laptop with a copy of Windows Server, VMWare or whatever, I could have an entire on-site warm spare of everything we run. Built-in UPS too! When you then get into "we need a real system", then it's a cinch to spin up instances in a handful of separate cloud servers and have the same.
But, these people are complaining about "losing money" when they could most likely have just turned on a cheap laptop and got access to all their data, a recent backup of everything they had (e.g. web transactions) and maybe even got a chance to operate their services from anywhere in the world (sure, it'd take a little tweaking of settings, but at least you'd have the option).