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.

Unlike in traditional SaaS, low gross margins in an AI company can be a positive indicator. They often reflect high inference costs, which directly correlates with strong user engagement with core AI features. High margins might suggest the AI is not the main product driver.

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.

While AI companies are structurally lower gross margin due to cloud and LLM costs, this may be offset by significantly lower operating expenses. AI tools can make engineering, sales, and legal teams more efficient, potentially leading to a higher terminal operating margin than traditional SaaS businesses, which is what ultimately matters.

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.