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.

When evaluating AI companies, focus on customer love (gross retention) and efficient acquisition over gross margins. High margins are less critical initially, as the 99%+ decline in model input costs suggests a clear path to future profitability if the core product is sticky.

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.

The compute-heavy nature of AI makes traditional 80%+ SaaS gross margins impossible. Companies should embrace lower margins as proof of user adoption and value delivery. This strategy mirrors the successful on-premise to cloud transition, which ultimately drove massive growth for companies like Microsoft.

Don't judge AI companies by their blended margins. The current 'subsidy' of free inference credits is a healthy form of customer acquisition that converts into high-LTV power users. This is far superior to the 2021 model of raising VC funds only to funnel them into Google and Facebook ads as 'empty calorie' growth.

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.

In rapidly evolving AI markets, founders should prioritize user acquisition and market share over achieving positive unit economics. The core assumption is that underlying model costs will decrease exponentially, making current negative margins an acceptable short-term trade-off for long-term growth.

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.