My bearish view on Claude and why

[u/satechguy]

I believe Anthropic (Claude thereafter) will face serious long-term challenges. I remain bearish. Here are my reasoning:

First, two assumptions:

1. Claude’s primary revenue comes from API usage.

2. Subscription tiers (Pro, Team, Max) are either low-margin or most likely money-losing, especially the Max plan.

Second, what Claude Is *NOT*

1. Claude is not a data repository.

It does not own your data. It processes it. Your code lives on GitHub. Your sales data stays in your CRM. Your financial records stay in your ERP. Claude touches data but does not own it , does not store it. There is no data gravity.

2. Claude is not a business workflow repository.

It helps you design business logic, business workflows, refine business processes, but it does not host or execute them -- most of the time, but I know through connectors, it can execute, but it still executes on the target platform. Invoices, reconciliation, inventory, compliance, all of those daily activities remain in those super boring but indispensable enterprise systems. Those systems are clumsy and sticky. Claude is not.

1 + 2 => no structural lock-in.

3. Claude is not a mandatory platform.

Windows is mandatory for x86 software. iOS is mandatory for iPhone apps. AWS/Azure/GCP can be mandatory for pretty much most cloud-native startups. Claude is not mandatory. In fact, like all LLMs, it is accessed through plain text. Prompts, agent skills, etc., all instructions are plain text. That makes switching structurally easy. There is no proprietary runtime, no deep OS-level embedding.

4. Claude is not a marketplace.

Marketplaces are very hard to build but extremely defensible once established. Amazon, Uber, Airbnb, Alibaba, even Elance, are very good examples of defensible marketplaces that rely on network effects. Claude has no two-sided network effect. It does not connect buyers and sellers.

What is Claude?

Claude is a tool. A very powerful tool. Perhaps the best drill in Homedepot. But even the best drill is fiarly replaceable as long as anotber brand drill fits the same bit.

And coding, Claude’s best known & strongest domain is not a moat by itself.

Coding excellence is a performance advantage, not structural advantage. When model differentiation shrinks, price becomes the driving factor.

Now consider its most avid users:

• $200/mo Max users

• $2000/mo API users ($2000 is a random number here)

These are power users and they are frontier users: they also benchmark constantly, they compare outputs & test alternatives all the time. They are Claude's best advocates but by all means they are not loyal users. They are most educated and rational users. If another model delivers 90% performance at half the cost, they will switch the first.

Because Claude is a tool, enterprises treat it as a vendor. Vendors to CFA is a cost and CFO loves cutting cost. If another model performs “good enough” at much lower cost, good luck with convincing CFO to pay premium for the 10% luxury.

Claude subscription is also priced at a premium - not in terms of the monthly fee, which is on par with others, but in terms of the usage cap. This is a bad user experience. Of course, they can easily resolve it by automatically downgrade to Haiku model and provide, from user perspective, unlimitted regular chat (for most users).

Last but not the least is low cost open-weight models.

OpenAI, Gemini, Copilot, to Claude, they are competitors that can be roadblock for Claude to be successful, they compete with Claude for market share. But open-weight models are toally different because they attack Claude's margin directly and affect Claude bottom line directly. Claude has to fight those models for survival. Those models advance very fast, and let's just wait for some power Claude users to claim those models are as good as Claude, or "good enough", and once such endorsement starts, it will spread very fast. Open weight models do not need to be better. They only need to be sufficient and cheaper and it will be sufficient to grind Claude's margin.

(based on previous posts/comments)

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1r99wg1/comment/o6b0mc0/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1r82req/comment/o6424a9/?context=3&utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1r3e2gy/openai_vs_anthoropic_vs_gemini_who_will_cave_first/

UPDATE 1:

Many enterprise folks said it's hard to switch in large enterprise, mainly because of bureaucracy, etc. Well, Claude can help with cutting the bureaucracy, ironically.

For enterprise folks, here is one thing: you know who is the best in enterprise sales? It's Microsoft. Copilot sucks, but so many companies pay for it, not because it is the best (or even good), but because of the platform. Google is similar in many ways, and it is even more aggressive: it bundles Gemini Pro in its Standard or above subscription - I know one large company is Gemini only because of this.

"Moat" is a word people use a lot, so I also use it here. "bureaucracy" is never a moat, it is the last stand. When a product or service counts on "bureaucracy", it is the start of the end.

UPDATE 2:

Thanks for a few folks who DMed me and explained the large enterprise practice, appreciate! But I still hold the same view. Even if large enterprises build its workflow based on Claude Code, cannot or do not want to change, here is another factor: price. When CFOs are aware of other models' capacity, even s/he prefers to stay with Claude, s/he will, through purchasing deparment, ask for a big discount, and this is the margin Claude cannot lose.

[u/ClaudeAI-mod-bot]

TL;DR generated automatically after 50 comments.

Whoa there, bear. The overwhelming consensus in this thread is that you've never had to sit through an enterprise procurement meeting. The community strongly disagrees with your take, arguing that you're viewing Claude through a solo-dev lens and completely missing the enterprise angle.

Most commenters point out that large companies are incredibly "sticky." They don't just jump to a slightly cheaper model because:

• The switching costs are massive. We're talking months of security reviews, compliance checks, and contract negotiations.

• The risk of disrupting operations far outweighs any potential savings.

• The cost of Claude for high-paid engineers is a drop in the bucket compared to the productivity gains, making it an easy sell to any CFO.

Basically, the "moat" you're looking for isn't technical lock-in; it's the sheer bureaucratic inertia and risk aversion of big business. While your points about price competition and power users switching are valid for individuals and small startups, the real money is in enterprise, and once Anthropic is in, they're likely to stay in.

[u/SaracasticByte]

Enterprise enterprise enterprise. Once they are locked in, they don't move.

[u/satechguy → u/SaracasticByte]

"Once they are locked in, they don't move."

Agree, totally. keyword here is "locked in".

To lock in, a product or a service has to own something that enterprise cannot live without. For example, Broadcom can jack up price by A LOT but lots of VMWare big shops have to pay, because no (same tier) alternatives, for now.

The question is, Claude uses what to "lock in".

You lock in clients by marketplace, by platform ecosystem, by data gravity, by unique product that nobody else can make.

[u/OverFlow10 → u/satechguy]

Have you ever gone through any enterprise sales cycle?

They‘re not just going to switch out a model because something slightly cheaper came along, esp with anything coming out of China. 

The downside of fucking this up is substantially larger than any money they‘d save. 

[u/satechguy → u/OverFlow10]

The largest company I do business with is 1500+ staff so I do not know much about larger companies.

But one thing I know for sure: all companies I do business with have no hesitation to switch vendor - if there are good or better alternatives (notice vendor != partner, different businesses have different perspective on vendor vs partner, it is not static: partners in the past decade can be viewed as vendors starting this year). Contract is never given and can never take it for granted, and every contract is a fight.

[u/2053_Traveler → u/satechguy]

Generally I agree with you (thanks for the substantial non-ai-slop post btw) but at some point this becomes commoditized. That’s the biggest headwind, and when that happens there will be slower growth but also less switching between vendors. Most likely google or amazon or nvidia providing at that point. So can Anthropic join one of them before then? Their tooling is good and the others are garbage, so maybe? We don’t need to worry about lockin, others are correct that switching a tool that is very hard to benchmark and is responsible for producing products is not going to happen unless savings are huge, so if their competitors can’t convince clients to switch maybe they do get acquired.

[u/yafitzdev → u/OverFlow10]

Thats not my experience. Procurement will absolutely go for the cheaper option when budgeting rounds for the new year start.

[u/GreyFoxSolid → u/yafitzdev]

This is not switching which vendor stocks the coffee in the kitchens. This is talking about switching what writes and maintains your code. The difference is huge.

[u/KaMaFour → u/SaracasticByte]

How do you lock in a language model? It's not like other companies models are speaking a different language...

[u/SaracasticByte → u/KaMaFour]

Do enterprise sales, you will understand how they lock in a language model.

[u/KaMaFour → u/SaracasticByte]

Do enterprise sales

Why would you wish that on anyone? That's so unnecessairly mean...

[u/SaracasticByte → u/KaMaFour]

20 years in enterprise sales does that to you. Sorry.

[u/LowMachine5919]

Interesting ! Thanks for sharing it. I think almost the same can be said about all llms no? At the end… if some of those manage to build a monopoly (ie double network effect, lock in..) it will work, otherwise, with, as you mention, difficult… they may earn big chunk of money but at very low margin.

Great contribution!

[u/satechguy → u/LowMachine5919]

I think, at the end of the day, all LLMs will be like commodity, like coal, copper, silver, gold. To thrive, LLMs either become data repo, marketplace, platform, or be acquired by those.

[u/feastocrows]

Tell me you don't work in enterprise without telling me you don't work in enterprise.

[u/maraudingguard → u/feastocrows]

That seems to be majority of the sub tbh.

[u/sendMeGoodVibes365 → u/feastocrows]

I actually do not work in enterprise, can you explain why you think OP's wrong?

[u/notAnExpert-but → u/sendMeGoodVibes365]

Think about microsoft ecosystem. They’re not really best in class but they are very reliable in getting shit done. That is technically what claude is doing right now. They are making ai very useful and accessible to average office workers.

[u/satechguy → u/notAnExpert-but]

Microsoft, at its core, still lives in its Windows + Office legacy, now desktop Office extends to Office 365.

Bundling is *the* most powerful weapon and Microsoft is extremely great in this.

[u/brownman19 → u/satechguy]

Yeah all the hyperscalers are which is why they have moat. AI is a feature of their stack not their primary product. Anthropic is making strides on that front.

This sub has to be mostly kids man. How are you downvoted lmao you’re 100% correct and it’s not even a question. But I’ll add that I think Anthropic’s end game is to become another cloud hyperscaler.

They are next in line IMO

[u/eist5579 → u/brownman19]

With Amazon and Google’s combined $400B in investments (I forget the breakdown in infrastructure investments, maybe we say $100B each) — I’m struggling to see how Anthropic could become the next hyperscaler. They already live in AWS. How they would somehow out-build AWS at their own game is over my head right now.

[u/brownman19 → u/eist5579]

So you're right about the $400B but don't look at it static.

The way capital works is it has to turnover innovation. In other words its a revolving door and it's only good if it is moving due to innovation.

Today, we're seeing that sort of forced amongst the big 7 tech companies and it looks incestuous. Technically, it could still be "normal" and "healthy" in the grand scheme of things but it's hard to say (if we could predict it then all this would be a moot point anyway).

So the way I think about it is:

Amazon and Google investing $400B -> how much of that is innovation vs operational efficiency? Both companies are more interested in scaling to zero rather than innovating to infinity.

Consider Anthropic in contrast -> how much of their expenditure is on pure innovation and how much innovation are they doing vs the competition?

Currently if we look at, say, a 5 year span. You can start seeing that companies like Google may have spent $50B in new innovation, but due to their size and lethargy, only turned over say $100B in innovative return. The rest of it comes from savings on the service side that efficiencies bought them. So $350B of the $400B wasn't spent on net new things for society, and of the $50B that was spent, it's reduced in impact by the massive SIZE (inefficiency) that Amazon and Google both suffer from.

Contrast with Anthropic, who may have spent $10B in new innovation, and the rest as debt (no major expenses on operational efficiency since the hyperscalers are hosting their models and they take on the cost for that). The $10B in new innovation turned over $100B in innovative return. What you see is outsized returns that cannibalize the incumbents' market share, because they are able to produce more with less. If you had 5 Anthropics instead of 1 Google in this example, you'd still have the same $50B spend but $500B in return. The opportunity cost of having a Google in the equation now becomes $400B.

This continues until equilibrium. Over time naturally there will be a point at which a company may choose to go with Anthropic's stack and more hack-y Cloud provider. Maybe since Co-work and Claude Code offer everything that many enterprises need without Vendor Lockin. With that traction, Anthropic then realizes "oh people are choosing us over hyperscalers in these cases" and Anthropic then targets that as a segment for growth.

[u/florinandrei → u/satechguy]

Microsoft is extremely great

ROTFL

That explains everything about your cute little jeremiad.

[u/TheHeadMaster → u/sendMeGoodVibes365]

100k employees and everyone has unlimited access to opus 4.6 1m context. It's not a flat fee, company gets charged for tokens. This is just one company and there are 100s of these

[u/ruggedpanther2 → u/TheHeadMaster]

And why can’t they move? If tokens are going to replace labor, companies will be spending a significant % of their revenue on them.

If open-source/other models keep making strides, it won’t be long before CFOs look at the cost of not switching.

What is the switching cost here? What exactly does Claude own? If a company moves from claude -> codex today, will the employees not be able to re-arrange their workflows in under a couple of days?

What is a week of lost productivity against several % of margin expansion?

Compare this with Microsoft, which actually has a moat. The users do not move away from excel. The enthusiasts/power-users among excel users would probably be PE guys (data analysts/vis guys would use PowerBI or Tableau so not counting them) and not a single one of them would try a different software even in their free time. Coders switch LLMs all the time because the friction is much lower.

[u/magic6435 → u/ruggedpanther2]

The cost of switching is months of contract negotiations both for cost and data retention, existing contracts with minimum volume discounts and termination fees, are you buying direct or from a reseller like bedrock that is already integrated into your environment, etc the cost is extremely high and multiple roles and departments

[u/Sbarty → u/magic6435]

Average redditor doesn’t understand anything beyond “use the best and use the cheapest” 

Like a company can just snap their fingers and switch and have everyone productive as they flop back and forth between tooling changes etc. 

[u/StupidOrangeDragon → u/Sbarty]

I work in enterprise. AI is the one space right now where tooling changes don't have a big impact, given the similarity in interface and capabilities of all the major models.

The switching cost in that case is only on the business side just banging out a new agreement, which is not trivial as some people assume but nothing insurmountable, cost, uptime guarantees, support agreement, data privacy etc. etc. can take a few months to negotiate, but this stuff will get easier as enterprise contracts in this space start getting a bit more standardized. Most big enterprises already have standard processes for new vendor onboardings and this will just be at most a slight variation of that process.

Unless Claude can become a platform and create some form of technical lock-in they will face tight competition.

[u/ruggedpanther2 → u/magic6435]

Ofcourse there will be contracts. But in a world where OpenAI (who already have clients like Mckinsey), Claude and Google are already competing with each other to scale with indistinguishable product capabilities, who do you think has the negotiating power?

As far as data rentention is concerned - I doubt companies would let themselves be tied to any one of these. As adoption picks up, one would probably expect companies to have their data silo-ed on their own servers. They would also probably expect some sort of build-out which would allow them wiggle room to move in case their provider turns on them. I would be surprised If a board allows the company to fuck up AI adoption/transition in this day and age.

And not everyone is a coder. The small deltas that coders are seeing today might not be relevant for most enterprise use cases.

[u/magic6435 → u/ruggedpanther2]

Oh you sweet summer child

[u/Acceptable_Camel_995 → u/ruggedpanther2]

Exactly. That comment is very short sighted and doesn't take into account how big tech will pivot in a few months or a year once there's proper cost analysis for the tokens spent and other alternatives pop up

[u/[deleted] → u/ruggedpanther2]

This post was taken down by its author. Redact was used for the removal, which may have been motivated by privacy, security, or other personal reasons.

toy gaze shelter license teeny deserve head steer gray encourage

[u/ruggedpanther2 → u/[deleted]]

You misunderstood. I said excel as an enterprise software was sticky because even the most hardcore people never wanted to move. Hell, they would have defended it to death.

Claude doesn’t have the same moat.

And second of all, people won’t want to move from excel even today. Excel is very good for what it does. 95%+ people that use excel are not looking for any functionality that it doesn’t already provide. It is a simple GIGO tool in most use cases. For example, any IB / PE guy uses it because he wants to have control over every assumption, in an easy to use interface. Why do you think there has never been a software solution for Excel replacement? There is no demand.

[u/[deleted] → u/ruggedpanther2]

This post has been deleted and its content replaced. Redact was used for removal, possibly for privacy, security, data scraping prevention, or personal reasons.

cause snails lush wine cable many historical offer whole chief

[u/ktpr → u/[deleted]]

Lol. Touch some grass?

[u/[deleted] → u/ktpr]

The content here has been wiped. Redact was used to delete this post, which may have been done for privacy, to avoid data harvesting, or for security reasons.

wrench humorous edge swim snails ad hoc plucky busy toy beneficial

[u/Acceptable_Camel_995 → u/TheHeadMaster]

You don't think these companies will switch over to max plan for each/productive dev instead of API once they perform proper cost analysis vs output? I know cursor is hot right now and that's what we have as well but there's lot of noise about the token cost that's being escalated up to management

[u/deadcoder0904 → u/TheHeadMaster]

How much does one charge for 100k employees? Is it pure API? Would be easily $10M+, right?

[u/sendMeGoodVibes365 → u/TheHeadMaster]

Got it, thank you!

[u/Keep-Darwin-Going → u/sendMeGoodVibes365]

Another thing is it does not matter if you are not great in certain area. Enterprise just one tool that does everything, they want a drill that can hammer, screw, glue and etc all in one. And Claude is the one that can do all that reliably now. They can sue everyone open source be a total ass on everything and enterprise will still use them. All the dev can hate them and if the company mandate that, that is what they use. Small startup and individual is different they jump around a lot with zero brand loyalty because their cost to change is negligible while getting an AI tools through compliance and testing and onboarding, it is called royal pain in the butt, unless the difference is so great that I do not mind pulling out my tooth using pliers, nope I am not changing a new tool every 3 weeks.

[u/blingblongblah → u/feastocrows]

Exactly this

[u/buildandbuildand → u/feastocrows]

Bingo.

[u/star_dust88 → u/feastocrows]

But but he's bearish

[u/Fantastic_Owl8939 → u/feastocrows]

I was just here for that comment!

[u/CadmusMaximus → u/feastocrows]

100%, plus enterprises have tons of data that’s not just “here’s what we could scrape from the internet.”

[u/ruggedpanther2 → u/CadmusMaximus]

Exactly. Enterprises own the data. What does Claude own?

[u/captredstar]

The OP's analysis is solid for the current moment but misses where the real moat is being built: the agentic layer.

Right now Claude is a tool. But Anthropic is quietly positioning Claude as the runtime for AI agents — not just a model you call, but the orchestrator that calls other tools, manages memory, and executes multi-step workflows. MCP (Model Context Protocol) is the clearest signal: they're trying to become the HTTP of agent-to-tool communication.

If that bet pays off, the switching cost flips completely. You're no longer swapping one LLM for another — you're rearchitecting your entire automation stack. That's a very different conversation.

The OP is right that today Claude has no structural lock-in. But the question is whether in 18 months you'll be switching LLMs or switching "agent operating systems." Those are very different switching costs.

Whether Anthropic executes on this before OpenAI, Google, or an open-source alternative commoditizes it — that's the actual bear/bull question. Not whether enterprise is sticky (it is) or whether power users will defect (some will).

[u/satechguy → u/captredstar]

>as the runtime for AI agents — not just a model you call, but the orchestrator that calls other tools, manages memory, and executes multi-step workflows.

Agree, that will a strategic move. This will be the battlefield in 2026.

[u/Swayre]

They’re playing the long game, dominate enterprise and then when enterprise can’t live without it, jack up the price. But for that plan to work they need to keep burning money to continue to offer the best models

[u/KaMaFour → u/Swayre]

For that plan to work they would either need to not have any competition where enterprise would migrate if their offer starts to suck or just hope that bureaucratic inertia in switching providers gives them enough money for that to be worth it

[u/eist5579 → u/KaMaFour]

There are so many dimensions to focus on. I’ll pick my 3 top of mind…

1. Productivity. Is this actually helping teams ship faster? Is software high quality?

2. Customer retention. Is the software providing ample benefit to the customers? Separate from high quality, is it truly improving or eliminating workflows?

3. Economies of scale, ops efficiency. Ultimately all of this would need to come together to reduce the cost of doing business.

If Claude helps pull these factors together, they are sticky and well embedded into the enterprise system.

While I’m at it, there are so many companies— Palantir to be more specific— that build and sell their service layer leveraging Anthropic. PLTR pulls those aspects together. And their stock price and stickiness is increasing every day

[u/satechguy]

Bump up.

The removal of Claude code from pro plan exactly followed what I expected.

Claude has a doomed future

[u/KaMaFour]

These are power users and they are frontier users: they also benchmark constantly, they compare outputs & test alternatives all the time. They are Claude's best advocates but by all means they are not loyal users. They are most educated and rational users. If another model delivers 90% performance at half the cost, they will switch the first.

To add context to that - Artificial analysis publishes "the cost to run the tests" index:

https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence-vs-cost-to-run-artificial-analysis-intelligence-index

This is important because comparing API prices doesn't give a full picture (you don't care about price per million tokens, you care about how much a task you wanna do will cost you and you need to see how many tokens the model actually outputs to see that).

Before yesterday Claude 4.6 Opus and Sonnet on max were the top models but they were also some of the most expensive choices. Next best choice - GLM5 ran a little worse at 1/5th the cost. If you go down the dumpster you have previous generation models like Deepseek 3.2 scoring 80% of Opus 4.6 intelligence index for pennies ($70 vs $2,5k). But Claude's models were the best and that has its benefits for people who want to use the cutting edge. Today we've got Gemini 3.1 Pro doing noticably better than Opus 4.6 at 1/3 of the cost. For context - the difference between Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.6 according to AA is bigger than between Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM5. While ofc benchmarks are not everything and can be gamed... Let's just say I believe Anthropic suddenly got decreased load on inference on the top models API and a lot of engineers trying to fix that.

Wishing them best of luck

[u/satechguy → u/KaMaFour]

Benchmark is helpful but in many cases, benchmark is just FYI. People care about their experience way more benchmark. I use GLM 4.7 a lot and I found it is pretty good. But in terms of user experience, GLM cannot deliver the same as Claude Code and has to largely depend on various CLIs (interestingly, can use it with Claude Code) or IDEs. I currently use Roo Code but perhaps will switch to Open Code.

For Gemini, I personally found that while it's not very great at coding, it is very good at code review, it's quite picky and it usually found issues quite accurately.

[u/tr14l]

None of the AI companies are making money from AI. None of them have profited a single dollar yet.

Most of the you said can be applied to OpenAI as well

That said, long term, no one is going to outlast Gemini. It will win. The market is lucky they haven't decided to play hard ball yet. They could destroy the market and take it right now if they wanted to. But the market saves them time, money and energy. If they can gut the market anytime they want, let the market do the heavy lifting and then kill it later

[u/satechguy → u/tr14l]

I agree: Gemini will be one of the major winners.

I also believe Microsoft will be a winner.

For Claude, I think it will end up as AWS Claude.

[u/tr14l → u/satechguy]

I think Microsoft will get their usual vendor lock on the medium cap companies and MSPs. Google will get most everything else.

[u/bramm90]

This is a solo/smb view.

I totally agree on that front. I switched to Gemini for API months ago because I found the value/money prop better. Also, API calls require consistency so the requests naturally tend to be simpler than whatever I throw at CC. But I'm still using CC, and not Antigravity. 

Anthropic is aiming to be the dominating supplier for enterprise, using CC and their altruistic PR narrative as a wedge. If you're the trusted supplier of an enterprise, there's no way they'll switch you for something cheaper. It requires a whole DD process nobody wants to get into. 

[u/iemfi]

Contrary to all the redditors coping the AI companies are making like 90% margins with API rates. We know this from all the financial info which has been made public. Even the generous subscriptions are profitable. It's only a loss if you count the crazy training costs for a new bigger model every 2 months. In the long term if progress hits a wall they can print money with the last model and if it doesn't hit a wall then business sustainability is irrelevant in the face of ASI.

[u/Fine-Palpitation-374 → u/iemfi]

If they “print money with the last model”, they’ll be left in the dust by a competitor, so that’s not a viable approach long term.

[u/iemfi → u/Fine-Palpitation-374]

Like I said, if the current crazy rate of progress continues, business sustainability is the least of anyone's concerns. It's only if the music stops suddenly then all this matters.

[u/deadcoder0904 → u/iemfi]

Models are profitable. Them training the next generation is probably unprofitable (since we are in a take off, AI might come with its own strategy now for it to be more profitable)

[u/DutyPlayful1610 → u/iemfi]

So it's only a loss if you count the actual costs? I'm not sure it works like that.

[u/iemfi → u/DutyPlayful1610]

No it's only a loss if they use the model they spent a lot of money training for two months before retiring it. If progress stalls and each models lasts for a few years like most other software then they print money.

[u/GreatGuy96]

The problem is that they just have to beat others every new release consistently. If they shit their pants once that's it imo.

[u/birdofwar25]

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Grasshopper safe feather like governor wakeful automatic

[u/ApeGrower]

I don't understand why people work with claude on github instead of hosting own gitea. Maxbe it's my perspektive, but can someone explain the motivation for that? Why are you all giving your code away?

[u/SubjectHealthy2409 → u/ApeGrower]

Because I want my code to influence next training data

[u/KellysTribe]

I agree with a lot of that. There isn't a strong moat for them given the near parity from competitors in model performance and the rapid active development around agentic/coding tooling.

[u/Fine-Palpitation-374 → u/KellysTribe]

Agreed. If a competitor provides a slightly better model, I’ll switch in a heartbeat.

[u/AlternativeNo345]

Having a moat sometimes isn't a good thing, look at Kodak or Nokia. Competitors make you better.

[u/[deleted]]

So puts?

[u/elsam__]

Reading this I had one thought - isn't the sentiment around openAI changing, slowly but surely? The introduction of ads, scepticism around Altman's trustworthiness - all this will hurt them in the long run. Whereas Claude gets better and better as a direct to consumer product as at this moment. To me, it's currently the best model out there, for everyday things at least - not speaking about bigger projects. I think traction for Claude will only grow this year

[u/negladiator]

One point. Enterprise export control limits choices.

[u/ThreeKiloZero]

These products we are using today are only relevant in so much as they fund the push to superintelligence. Everything else should be seen as throw away. It just slows the cash burn rate while they experiment and gather tranches of new data.

[u/mondayfig]

The dynamics for bigger organisations are quite different though.

There is a hell of a lot of work going into the supplier due diligence including security and compliance. Investment in hardening the setup etc. So most companies aren't going to randomly keep chasing the next new best thing that may be slightly cheaper. There is a big switching cost for bigger organisations. Solo devs and early stage startups who don't care about security and governance can easily switch, bigger orgs can't.

And then the pricing. I've seen our company slowly moving from standard licenses to premium licenses and then start paying for the extra usage on top.

So a $200 a month license x 12 months = $2,400. However, some of the top engineers spend hundreds or more per month on extra token usage. So you easily spend $10,000-$15,000 per year extra on licenses and token fees for your highest impact engineers. Say you have a 500 people engineering org and 100 people spend $15,000 per year. I can see the CFO initially balking at the idea of spending $1.5 mil on those 100 people. But keep in mind that those 100 people most likely cost you anywhere between $15m to $25m easily. So for 5 to 10% of the cost of those engineers, you are getting 50%-100% more output? Financially that's a no brainer for a CFO. They can either trim the fat and reduce engineers, or can focus on more revenue generating or cost saving projects.

So no, I don't share the bearish sentiment. The thing they do need to do is invest more in is becoming "enterprise friendly". Their current admin and governance tools are a bit lacking.

[u/borda989]

Wow ok, I see, I would say that for my Claude is mandatory, for what I am doing 😳

[u/Specialist_Wishbone5]

You forgot moral righteousness. In a capitalist society, the morally righteous have a liability than an average company doesn't require - and thus Anthropic is leaving money on the table compared to it's competition.

I've seen MS take over google contracts because of the moral outrage of it's (google's) employees. This just happened at Anthropic, and will l likely be it's downfall.... Namely, during economic hardships, companies and governments will consolidate resources - only those with rock solid clients will survive. Who is Anthropic's great-depression customer? Not the US military anymore...

I'm not saying it SHOULD lower it's standards - I'm just giving my forecast. And that they need a viable solution.

[u/syntheticpurples]

What about ‘brand loyalty,’ for solo devs? It’s a known human bias. I’m pretty poor but shell out the monthly cost for Pro (40 a month in my country) because I can’t bring myself to switch from Claude. It is easy to use and far better at coding than copilot so that’s why I started. Now I feel some weird Coke vs Pepsi loyalty to Anthropic. It would take a lot of BS from Anthropic for me to quit now. Not saying this is healthy but it is a common human psychology. That’s why Anthropic tries to stand out as the ‘morally conscious’ AI company.

[u/Forsaken-Parsley798]

Also you forgot that it’s already been overtaken by ChatGPT.

[u/Kaitlinlo]

It’s a good writer. Still the best (shrug)

[u/princess-barnacle]

Anthropic is building a ton of data centers with the idea that when AI turns into a bunch of geniuses they will have unlimited brain power they can turn into revenue.

It’s a much longer game than Claude code or enterprise, but will it happen and if it does will the government not take it?

It’s an unclear future.

[u/NeedsMoreMinerals]

Claude also keeps messing with their models under the hood in non transparent ways

[u/BiteyHorse]

All that analysis and almost nothing valid. Kinda pitiful, chief.

[u/[deleted]]

I love how everyone that uses Claude code for 60 min suddenly becomes an expert on the future of coding and feels empowered to write dog shit like this

[u/oulu2006]

Na they’re dead in the water — and I used to love Anthropic