A previous place that I worked at wanted to "get rid of the mainframe". That was the objective. Ignore the fact that it had 99% uptime and balanced to the penny, or they rapidly found out why it didn't balance, every month when they closed the books. A committee, which is a warning sign in and of itself, went shopping for a database-based ERP system. They had no experts in database technology in the group. They bought a system based on SQL Server. And everything it does is RBAR. Very bad schema design and indexing, and no stored procedures. They have to replace the server every other year while performance drops as the data set grows. If the system crashes, restore from backup and accept the data loss.
But they'll probably never get rid of it as that would mean accepting failure, plus they got rid of the people who understood how the org functioned, so it would be a truly herculean task to go to something else. Meanwhile, they also decided they didn't need a DBA: the vendor can do everything! Which means DBCCs didn't get checked, neither did backups, so when the SAN lost a drive one of their databases fell in to the bit bucket and they lost several months of unpaid billable information. And they're keeping the vendor.
Failure is ALWAYS an option, the question is what you do afterwards. Since they didn't want to listen to someone who knows how the technology works, in this case they'll have to live with it.
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]