"ChatGPT's share dropped from about 87% to roughly 72% in just twelve months. Over the same period, Gemini climbed from the mid-teens to more than 18%. In a market this young, that kind of swing is significant and signals intensifying competition. I argued that the core issue is not which model is marginally better. It is distribution. Gemini is everywhere inside Google's ecosystem. It appears naturally in search results, Chrome, Gmail, and Docs, which dramatically lowers friction for users. ChatGPT, by contrast, requires users to seek it out deliberately."
"Lee noted that OpenAI is valued like one of the world's largest companies despite never producing consistent profits. That raises the real possibility of a down round if future fundraising reflects slower growth or rising competition. I added that OpenAI has yet to present a detailed, investor-grade monetization roadmap. Targets like breakeven by 2030 are not substitutes for clear pricing, revenue, and cost projections. We closed by noting how this shift changes the AI narrative for public investors. A year ago, AI looked like a threat to companies such as Alphabet, Meta, and Amazon. Today, it increasingly looks like an advantage for firms that already control massive distribution channels."
OpenAI retains the largest share of AI chatbots but lost market share from about 87% to roughly 72% within twelve months. Gemini rose from the mid-teens to more than 18% over the same period, signaling intensifying competition. Distribution across Google products — search, Chrome, Gmail, and Docs — lowers user friction and accelerates Gemini adoption, while ChatGPT requires deliberate user discovery. OpenAI's $500 billion private valuation contrasts with limited profit history and an absence of an investor-grade monetization roadmap. Breakeven targets by 2030 do not replace clear pricing, revenue, and cost projections. Public investors increasingly view distribution-holding firms as advantaged in AI.
Read at 24/7 Wall St.
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]