The AI investment case might be inverted. While tech firms spend trillions on infrastructure with uncertain returns, traditional sector companies (industrials, healthcare) can leverage powerful AI services for a fraction of the cost. They capture a massive 'value gap,' gaining productivity without the huge capital outlay.

Related Insights

Instead of selling software to traditional industries, a more defensible approach is to build vertically integrated companies. This involves acquiring or starting a business in a non-sexy industry (e.g., a law firm, hospital) and rebuilding its entire operational stack with AI at its core, something a pure software vendor cannot do.

Unlike previous tech waves that trickled down from large institutions, AI adoption is inverted. Individuals are the fastest adopters, followed by small businesses, with large corporations and governments lagging. This reverses the traditional power dynamic of technology access and creates new market opportunities.

The real investment case for AI in Europe is not in creating foundational models but in adoption. The continent's vast 'old economy' index has significant potential for productivity gains. As AI's return on investment becomes clear, Europe could be re-rated as a major beneficiary of AI adoption, capitalizing on its large industrial base.

If AI is truly transformational, its greatest long-term value will accrue to non-tech companies that adopt it to improve productivity. Historical tech cycles show that after an initial boom, the producers of a new technology are eventually outperformed by its adopters across the wider economy.

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.

In a new, high-risk category, betting on infrastructure ('shovels') isn't necessarily safer. If the category fails, both app and infra lose. But if it succeeds, the application layer captures disproportionately more value, making the infrastructure a lower-upside bet for the same level of existential risk.

Before AI delivers long-term deflationary productivity, it requires a massive, inflationary build-out of physical infrastructure. This makes sectors like utilities, pipelines, and energy infrastructure a timely hedge against inflation and a diversifier away from concentrated tech bets.

Beyond AI infrastructure providers (NVIDIA, AWS), a key opportunity lies in the 'layer below'—companies like Uber and Spotify. They leverage big tech's tools but dominate specific verticals because they possess superior, niche-specific user data, which AI then supercharges for monetization and personalization.

Thrive Capital invested in an AI-powered accounting firm, not an accounting AI software tool. Their thesis is that in some industries, the service provider who uses AI to become hyper-efficient will capture more value than software vendors selling tools to a fragmented customer base. This is a bet on the business model, not just the technology.

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.

The Real AI Winners May Be Old-Economy Adopters, Not Cash-Burning Tech Providers | RiffOn