The "last mile" difficulty of implementing AI agents makes them economically viable for huge enterprise deals (justifying custom engineering) or mass-market apps. The traditional SaaS sweet spot—the $30k-$50k mid-market contract—is currently a "missing middle" because the cost to deliver the service is too high for the price point.
Related Insights
The new generation of AI automates workflows, acting as "teammates" for employees. This creates entirely new, greenfield markets focused on productivity gains for every individual, representing a TAM potentially 10x larger than the previous SaaS era, which focused on replacing existing systems of record.
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.
Traditional SaaS switching costs were based on painful data migrations, which LLMs may now automate. The new moat for AI companies is creating deep, customized integrations into a customer's unique operational workflows. This is achieved through long, hands-on pilot periods that make the AI solution indispensable and hard to replace.
Traditional SaaS companies are trapped by their per-seat pricing model. Their own AI agents, if successful, would reduce the number of human seats needed, cannibalizing their core revenue. AI-native startups exploit this by using value-based pricing (e.g., tasks completed), aligning their success with customer automation goals.
Anyone can build a simple "hackathon version" of an AI agent. The real, defensible moat comes from the painstaking engineering work to make the agent reliable enough for mission-critical enterprise use cases. This "schlep" of nailing the edge cases is a barrier that many, including big labs, are unmotivated to cross.
Standard SaaS pricing fails for agentic products because high usage becomes a cost center. Avoid the trap of profiting from non-use. Instead, implement a hybrid model with a fixed base and usage-based overages, or, ideally, tie pricing directly to measurable outcomes generated by the AI.
Unlike high-margin SaaS, AI agents operate on thin 30-40% gross margins. This financial reality makes traditional seat-based pricing obsolete. To build a viable business, companies must create new systems to capture more revenue and manage agent costs effectively, ensuring profitability and growth from day one.
Unlike SaaS which sells to limited software budgets (e.g., 1% of revenue), vertical AI agents automate core business functions. This allows them to tap into much larger operational and labor budgets. Companies can capture 4-10% of a customer's total spend by replacing expensive human-led tasks like customer support.
Dylan Field is skeptical that disposable, AI-generated apps will replace complex SaaS products. Real business software must handle countless edge cases, scale with teams, and support shared workflows—a level of complexity and institutional knowledge that today's agents are far from mastering.
Traditional software required deep vertical focus because building unique UIs for each use case was complex. AI agents solve this. Since the interface is primarily a prompt box, a company can serve a broad horizontal market from the beginning without the massive overhead of building distinct, vertical-specific product experiences.
