Fears of a single AI company achieving runaway dominance are proving unfounded, as the number of frontier models has tripled in a year. Newcomers can use techniques like synthetic data generation to effectively "drink the milkshake" of incumbents, reverse-engineering their intelligence at lower costs.
Related Insights
OpenAI, the initial leader in generative AI, is now on the defensive as competitors like Google and Anthropic copy and improve upon its core features. This race demonstrates that being first offers no lasting moat; in fact, it provides a roadmap for followers to surpass the leader, creating a first-mover disadvantage.
AI labs like Anthropic find that mid-tier models can be trained with reinforcement learning to outperform their largest, most expensive models in just a few months, accelerating the pace of capability improvements.
Small firms can outmaneuver large corporations in the AI era by embracing rapid, low-cost experimentation. While enterprises spend millions on specialized PhDs for single use cases, agile companies constantly test new models, learn from failures, and deploy what works to dominate their market.
The AI industry is not a winner-take-all market. Instead, it's a dynamic "leapfrogging" race where competitors like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic constantly surpass each other with new models. This prevents a single monopoly and encourages specialization, with different models excelling in areas like coding or current events.
AI favors incumbents more than startups. While everyone builds on similar models, true network effects come from proprietary data and consumer distribution, both of which incumbents own. Startups are left with narrow problems, but high-quality incumbents are moving fast enough to capture these opportunities.
Initially, even OpenAI believed a single, ultimate 'model to rule them all' would emerge. This thinking has completely changed to favor a proliferation of specialized models, creating a healthier, less winner-take-all ecosystem where different models serve different needs.
Despite billions in funding, large AI models face a difficult path to profitability. The immense training cost is undercut by competitors creating similar models for a fraction of the price and, more critically, the ability for others to reverse-engineer and extract the weights from existing models, eroding any competitive moat.
Despite its early dominance, OpenAI's internal "Code Red" in response to competitors like Google's Gemini and Anthropic demonstrates a critical business lesson. An early market lead is not a guarantee of long-term success, especially in a rapidly evolving field like artificial intelligence.
Conventional venture capital wisdom of 'winner-take-all' may not apply to AI applications. The market is expanding so rapidly that it can sustain multiple, fast-growing, highly valuable companies, each capturing a significant niche. For VCs, this means huge returns don't necessarily require backing a monopoly.
While the U.S. leads in closed, proprietary AI models like OpenAI's, Chinese companies now dominate the leaderboards for open-source models. Because they are cheaper and easier to deploy, these Chinese models are seeing rapid global uptake, challenging the U.S.'s perceived lead in AI through wider diffusion and application.
