Or even better engage with a neutral third party such as Jepsen to get on an even playing field and duke it out.
It's like the cloud in general, the cost is high but so is the hype. When all that dust settles over the coming years the business will start shopping on price. They will then realize they have been locked in to some extent and will need to start wriggling loose of the lock-in.
I found the Snowflake statement pretty reasonable. [0]
Vendor benchmarks are largely propaganda. What actually counts is performance on real-world workloads, starting with your own. Plus good bencharks are costly to do well. If vendors are going to invest in load testing, it's way better to do it as part of the QA process, which directly benefits users. The other thing for vendors to do is to drop DeWitt clauses so others can run benchmarks and share the results. Snowflake announced this in the statement and also changed their acceptable use policy accordingly. [1]
[0] https://www.snowflake.com/blog/industry-benchmarks-and-compe...
[1] https://www.snowflake.com/legal/acceptable-use-policy/
Disclaimer: My company runs a cloud service for ClickHouse that competes against Snowflake.
* being easy to manage * being able to scale up and down compute so you can get good performance without having to keep a bunch of machines running.