While AI expands software's capabilities, vendors may not capture the value. Companies could use AI to build solutions in-house more cheaply. Furthermore, traditional "per-seat" pricing models are undermined when AI reduces the number of employees required, potentially shrinking revenue even as the software delivers more value.

Related Insights

Established SaaS firms avoid AI-native products because they operate at lower gross margins (e.g., 40%) compared to traditional software (80%+). This parallels brick-and-mortar retail's fatal hesitation with e-commerce, creating an opportunity for AI-native startups to capture the market by embracing different unit economics.

As agencies adopt AI to increase efficiency, clients will rightfully question traditional pricing models based on billable hours. This creates an "arbitrage" problem, forcing agencies to redefine and justify their value based on strategic insight and outcomes, not just the labor involved.

Satya Nadella suggests a fundamental shift in enterprise software monetization. As autonomous AI agents become prevalent, the value unit will move from the human user ("per seat") to the AI itself. "Agents are the new seats," signaling a future where companies pay for automated tasks and outcomes, not just software access for employees.

The long-held belief that a complex codebase provides a durable competitive advantage is becoming obsolete due to AI. As software becomes easier to replicate, defensibility shifts away from the technology itself and back toward classic business moats like network effects, brand reputation, and deep industry integration.

AI is making core software functionality nearly free, creating an existential crisis for traditional SaaS companies. The old model of 90%+ gross margins is disappearing. The future will be dominated by a few large AI players with lower margins, alongside a strategic shift towards monetizing high-value services.

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.

Unlike traditional SaaS where high switching costs prevent price wars, the AI market faces a unique threat. The portability of prompts and reliance on interchangeable models could enable rapid commoditization. A price war could be "terrifying" and "brutal" for the entire ecosystem, posing a significant downside risk.

In a world where AI makes software cheap or free, the primary value shifts to specialized human expertise. Companies can monetize by using their software as a low-cost distribution channel to sell high-margin, high-ticket services that customers cannot easily replicate, like specialized security analysis.

Unlike traditional software that supports workflows, AI can execute them. This shifts the value proposition from optimizing IT budgets to replacing entire labor functions, massively expanding the total addressable market for software companies.

The push for AI-driven efficiency means many companies are past 'peak employee.' This creates a scenario analogous to a country with a declining population, where the total number of available seats is in permanent decline, making per-seat pricing a fundamentally flawed long-term business model.