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.

For a true AI-native product, extremely high margins might indicate it isn't using enough AI, as inference has real costs. Founders should price for adoption, believing model costs will fall, and plan to build strong margins later through sophisticated, usage-based pricing tiers rather than optimizing prematurely.

In the current market, AI companies see explosive growth through two primary vectors: attaching to the massive AI compute spend or directly replacing human labor. Companies merely using AI to improve an existing product without hitting one of these drivers risk being discounted as they lack a clear, exponential growth narrative.

VCs have traditionally ignored the massive $16T services sector due to its low margins. AI automation can fundamentally change this by eliminating repetitive tasks, allowing these companies to achieve margin profiles similar to software businesses, thus making the sector newly viable for venture investment.

A unique dynamic in the AI era is that product-led traction can be so explosive that it surpasses a startup's capacity to hire. This creates a situation of forced capital efficiency where companies generate significant revenue before they can even build out large teams to spend it.

Counterintuitively, very high gross margins in a company pitching itself as "AI" can be a warning sign. It may indicate that users aren't engaging with the core, computationally expensive AI features. Lower margins can signal genuine, heavy usage of the core AI product.

Unlike SaaS, where high gross margins are key, an AI company with very high margins likely isn't seeing significant use of its core AI features. Low margins signal that customers are actively using compute-intensive products, a positive early indicator.

Contrary to traditional software evaluation, Andreessen Horowitz now questions AI companies that present high, SaaS-like gross margins. This often indicates a critical flaw: customers are not engaging with the costly, core AI features. Low margins, in this context, can be a positive signal of genuine product usage and value delivery.

Many AI startups prioritize growth, leading to unsustainable gross margins (below 15%) due to high compute costs. This is a ticking time bomb. Eventually, these companies must undertake a costly, time-consuming re-architecture to optimize for cost and build a viable business.