New AI companies reframe their P&L by viewing inference costs not as a COGS liability but as a sales and marketing investment. By building the best possible agent, the product itself becomes the primary driver of growth, allowing them to operate with lean go-to-market teams.

Related Insights

For mature companies struggling with AI inference costs, the solution isn't feature parity. They must develop an AI agent so valuable—one that replaces multiple employees and shows ROI in weeks—that customers will pay a significant premium, thereby financing the high operational costs of AI.

The most immediate ROI for AI sales agents is not replacing existing salespeople, but engaging the long tail of low-value leads or free trial users in a PLG motion. This "AI-Led Growth" creates a business model where none existed before.

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.

Unlike traditional SaaS, achieving product-market fit in AI is not enough for survival. The high and variable costs of model inference mean that as usage grows, companies can scale directly into unprofitability. This makes developing cost-efficient infrastructure a critical moat and survival strategy, not just an optimization.

AI companies operate under the assumption that LLM prices will trend towards zero. This strategic bet means they intentionally de-prioritize heavy investment in cost optimization today, focusing instead on capturing the market and building features, confident that future, cheaper models will solve their margin problems for them.

Mature B2B SaaS companies, after achieving profitability, now face a new crisis: funding expensive AI agents to stay competitive. They must spend millions on inference to match venture-backed startups, creating a dilemma that could lead to their demise despite having a solid underlying business.

AI-native companies grow so rapidly that their cost to acquire an incremental dollar of ARR is four times lower than traditional SaaS at the $100M scale. This superior burn multiple makes them more attractive to VCs, even with higher operational costs from tokens.

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.

The traditional SaaS model—high R&D/sales costs, low COGS—is being inverted. AI makes building software cheap but running it expensive due to high inference costs (COGS). This threatens profitability, as companies now face high customer acquisition costs AND high costs of goods sold.

An emerging AI growth strategy involves using expensive frontier models to acquire users and distribution at an explosive rate, accepting poor initial margins. Once critical mass is reached, the company introduces its own fine-tuned, cheaper model, drastically improving unit economics overnight and capitalizing on the established user base.

AI-Native Startups Treat High Inference Costs as Their Core Marketing Budget | RiffOn