> You can argue that the company is using Akka so much so they should be paying that much, but at the same time it means that maybe the company would have been

> You can argue that the company is using Akka so much so they should be paying that much, but at the same time it means that maybe the company would have been better hiring a different engineer that would have used anything other than Akka. If the company had gone with Go or C#, they wouldn't be spending that $3.2M. The company would be better off if they hired a different engineer who wrote the system in Go rather than someone who decided they liked Scala and Akka. Or even fork it, continue development and just hire few more engineers. There is no amount of consulting that you can provide for a library that would be worth the money