The primary economic incentive driving AI development is not replacing software, but automating the vastly larger human labor market. This includes high-skill jobs like accountants, lawyers, and auditors, representing a multi-trillion dollar opportunity that dwarfs the SaaS industry and dictates where investment will flow.

The real investment case for AI in Europe is not in creating foundational models but in adoption. The continent's vast 'old economy' index has significant potential for productivity gains. As AI's return on investment becomes clear, Europe could be re-rated as a major beneficiary of AI adoption, capitalizing on its large industrial base.

If AI is truly transformational, its greatest long-term value will accrue to non-tech companies that adopt it to improve productivity. Historical tech cycles show that after an initial boom, the producers of a new technology are eventually outperformed by its adopters across the wider economy.

The economic incentive for VCs funding AI is replacing human labor, a $13 trillion market in the US alone. This dwarfs the $300 billion SaaS market, revealing the ultimate goal is automating knowledge work, not just building software.

C-suites are more motivated to adopt AI for revenue-generating "front office" activities (like investment analysis) than for cost-saving "back office" automation. The direct, tangible impact on making more money overcomes the organizational inertia that often stalls efficiency-focused technology deployments.

During major platform shifts like AI, it's tempting to project that companies will capture all the value they create. However, competitive forces ensure the vast majority of productivity gains (the "surplus") flows to end-users, not the technology creators.

The AI job impact conversation has moved beyond tech. Walmart's CEO expects AI to change every job and plans for flat headcount over the next three years, even while growing the business. This signals a new mainstream corporate playbook focused on productivity over job creation.

The AI investment case might be inverted. While tech firms spend trillions on infrastructure with uncertain returns, traditional sector companies (industrials, healthcare) can leverage powerful AI services for a fraction of the cost. They capture a massive 'value gap,' gaining productivity without the huge capital outlay.

Marks questions whether companies will use AI-driven cost savings to boost profit margins or if competition will force them into price wars. If the latter occurs, the primary beneficiaries of AI's efficiency will be customers, not shareholders, limiting the technology's impact on corporate profitability.