Personally I care more about my enjoyment of my day to day job than saving the company a tiny bit of money that they'll never give me.
My first job had only incompetent seniors that I had to explain SQL query performance to etc. I left very quickly since I realized I wouldn't learn much there. I can see such places benefiting greatly from AWS services.
Or you can run them even better on AWS assuming you had the same level of competence except in cloud deployments. Granted they'd probably pick a more specialized cloud platform than AWS for the specific problems and scale of the team.
I'm far from a AWS fan but this take can't even be deemed an apples-to-orange comparison.
"Classical" hosting at best matches EC2. The absolute high-end "classical" hosting offers at best also offer something resembling EC2's VPC. Forget about regions, let alone anything resembling availability zones.
Everything else that AWS offers ends up being nice-to-have conveniences. Stuff like object storage and pub-sub and message queues and managed nosql and classical RDBMS services and managed kubernetes and integrated infrastrucure-as-code systems are way outside what a "classical" hosting company offers
The past 10-15 years has seen enormous growth in eCommerce productivity as a portion of the overall economy (just google “gdp attributed to internet commerce” and similar phrases, there’s tons of data on this). The rise in the number of devops engineers and the amounts businesses spend on AWS hosting are often in service of business models that were simply impossible to even try before cloud computing.
Sure, everyone on HN seems to have a story about an organization going all “architecture astronaut”nuts with Kubernetes and then ending up with slower/more expensive infra, and it’s fun to tell those to each other, but there’s clearly a huge amount of economic activity being enabled here that wasn’t happening before.