If CentOS didn't exist, that customer segment would jump to OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, Debian, etc. Same story for Ansible, etc.
The real money is with the organizations that feel the need (for many good and bad reasons) to pay millions of dollars for support, consulting, and the like. They don't care about the people that are looking to save a few grand on licenses.
You know what, after thinking this through I agree with you. Reversing position publicly is always risky, but you're right I'd probably just move to Ubuntu and if I need support I'd pay Canonical. I have lots of familiarity with Cent/RHEL which is why I'd prefer that, but I could gain that with Debian/et al without too much effort.
It's possible that the existence of CentOS is partially keeping RHEL viable. Maybe Fedora would be enough to do that, but overall CentOS probably contributes to RHELs demand, rather than detracting.
I've used CentOS in every gig I've been at until my current one (we use full-on RHEL here). Even if they're not paying for support it means that the industry is still thinking Red Hat; a long play.
