Incumbents are disincentivized from creating cheaper, superior products that would cannibalize existing high-margin revenue streams. Organizational silos also hinder the creation of blended solutions that cross traditional product lines, creating opportunities for startups to innovate in the gaps.

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.

Established industries often operate like cartels with unwritten rules, such as avoiding aggressive marketing. New entrants gain a significant edge by deliberately violating these norms, forcing incumbents to react to a game they don't want to play. This creates differentiation beyond the core product or service.

Startups often fail to displace incumbents because they become successful 'point solutions' and get acquired. The harder path to a much larger outcome is to build the entire integrated stack from the start, but initially serve a simpler, down-market customer segment before moving up.

Incumbent companies are slowed by the need to retrofit AI into existing processes and tribal knowledge. AI-native startups, however, can build their entire operational model around agent-based, prompt-driven workflows from day one, creating a structural advantage that is difficult for larger companies to copy.

Startups often fail by making a slightly better version of an incumbent's product. This is a losing strategy because the incumbent can easily adapt. The key is to build something so fundamentally different in structure that competitors have a very hard time copying it, ensuring a durable advantage.

For incumbent software companies, an existing customer base is a double-edged sword. While it provides a distribution channel for new AI products, it also acts as "cement shoes." The technical debt and feature obligations to thousands of pre-AI customers can consume all engineering resources, preventing them from competing effectively with nimble, AI-native startups.

A major market opportunity exists when one side of an industry (e.g., insurance companies) adopts new technology like AI faster than its counterpart (e.g., hospitals). Startups can succeed by building tools that close this technology gap, effectively 'arming the rebels' and leveling the playing field.

In the age of AI, 10-15 year old SaaS companies face an existential crisis. To stay relevant, they must be willing to make radical changes to culture and product, even if it threatens existing revenue. The alternative is becoming a legacy player as nimbler startups capture the market.

Large platforms focus on massive opportunities right in front of them ('gold bricks at their feet'). They consciously ignore even valuable markets that require more effort ('gold bricks 100 feet away'). This strategic neglect creates defensible spaces for startups in those niche areas.

As the market leader, OpenAI has become risk-averse to avoid media backlash. This has “damaged the product,” making it overly cautious and less useful. Meanwhile, challengers like Google have adopted a risk-taking posture, allowing them to innovate faster. This shows how a defensive mindset can cede ground to hungrier competitors.