义乌五金电器博览会20日开幕 打造五金行业的义博会
We're back on 20VC, with Harry, Rory from Scale and SaaStr's Jason Lemkin. On the $600B AI capex boom that's already surpassed dot-com levels, why every developer will soon spend $10K monthly on AI tools, and whether Big Tech has become too powerful to regulate.
The Bottom Line Upfront
Jason Lemkin (SaaStr): "I think every developer at a top tech company growing quickly is going to get $10,000 a month of AI credits. Everyone's going to get $10,000, not $200, which is what many are doing today. We thought that was a lot a couple months ago. They're all going to get $10,000 a month.? Shopify is already there for some of its top developers."
Harry Stebbings (20VC): "Speed of deployment equals relevance. And I think about this because we're very disciplined on three-year fund cycles. Temporal diversification... but I see actually cadence of deployment can lead to relevance in a way that really benefits that manager."
Rory O'Driscoll (Scale Venture Partners): "Sometimes rules of thumb or heuristics are in place because across cycles they've been proven to be correct... my guess is some part of this trend makes total sense and some part of it you'll look back after the next down and turn and say, 'Oh yeah, that's why we had that rule.'"
The venture world is experiencing its most dramatic structural shift in decades. From Benchmark's partner exodus to Elad Gil's one-man $5 billion fund, from Anthropic's meteoric $4B ARR trajectory to the coming $10K monthly AI spend per developer—the old rules are crumbling in real-time.
In the latest SaaStr + 20VC deep dive, Jason Lemkin, Harry Stebbings, and Rory O'Driscoll dissected the seismic changes reshaping venture capital, AI monetization, and the future of B2B software. What emerged was a masterclass in recognizing when fundamental assumptions need updating—and when they don't.
When the Best Gig in Venture Isn't Enough: The Benchmark Reboot
Benchmark, the gold standard of venture partnerships for three decades, now has just three partners remaining after Victor Lazarte's departure. For context: being a Benchmark partner was previously considered one of the most coveted positions in all of venture capital.
"The stunning fact now is someone can be in the best gig in venture and decide no it's not enough," observed O'Driscoll. "I need something more and they can actually probably pull that off."
Lemkin offered a contrarian take: "If it were me, if I were myself at that time at a similar spot, I wouldn't leave Benchmark... it's so powerful to meet a founder and say you're from Benchmark."
But Stebbings pushed back on the brand-first mindset: "What you find attractive about being on your own... is the ability to pour large amounts of cash into great companies. Scale of cash is almost a more attractive magnet than brand."
The deeper insight? The market has fundamentally shifted. Top-tier talent can now raise massive funds independently, bypassing traditional partnership structures entirely. This isn't just about individual preferences—it's about LPs financing exactly the behaviors they spent decades telling VCs not to do.
The Elad Gil Phenomenon: Breaking Every LP Rule—And Getting Rewarded
Elad Gil represents the perfect case study of this new reality. His track record speaks for itself: seed investor in Airbnb and Stripe, with access to category-defining companies across multiple sectors.
"What it says is we will now finance you to do all the things that we spent 20 years telling every other venture firm not to do," O'Driscoll noted. "What they're showing by their actions... is they also like a product that says, 'Thank you for your input on being focused. I'm ignoring it.'"
Gil's approach defies traditional LP wisdom:
Yet it's working spectacularly. The reason? "Idiosyncratic success triumphs bland mediocre standard advice," as O'Driscoll put it. "Winners win."
Lemkin added crucial context about Gil's strategy: "He's very similar in terms of making sure that whatever that category leader is... he is in that leader and he's in it big... whether it's Stripe he or whether it's Harvey he is in that leader."
The $10K Developer Spend Revolution: AI's True TAM Emerges
Perhaps the most eye-opening discussion centered on AI monetization—specifically, how drastically the venture community has underestimated per-developer spending potential.
Lemkin shared his personal experience: "I was on a path to spend $8,000 a month vibe coding." But that was just the beginning. "Now the context windows have gotten longer... you could have up to a 15-minute long context window while it's thinking through debugging or complex stuff... Run four of them at the same time or maybe even 15. That 8K bill could easily be 10K."
The implications are staggering. Traditional software assumptions about developer tools pricing—think $200-500 per seat—are being obliterated.
"Every leading tech company, it's cheaper than hiring any human and you can't find humans," Lemkin explained. "So, if that means a 50x growth per developer spend, it's going to be a CFO's nightmare. But... that's 50x growth from where we are today."
This isn't theoretical. Shopify's CTO already gives developers unlimited AI credits, with top performers using $10K monthly. The CEO of Replit confirmed: "Any great developer will consume almost unlimited tokens no matter how cheap they are."
Anthropic's $4B Trajectory: The Reacceleration Story
Anthropic's jump from $1B to $4B ARR—and its valuation increase from $100B to $180B—exemplifies this new reality.
"The growth rate appears to have accelerated which is stunning," O'Driscoll observed. "Most your expectation is you start off growing at 300% then 200% then 100%. These guys appear to have reaccelerated at scale."
The market is pricing in not just growth, but accelerating growth at massive scale—a phenomenon that validates the $10K developer spend thesis.
Stebbings noted the token economics: "There's infinite demand for this product right now at the price point of 200 bucks and the cost of generating those tokens the economics doesn't work for the model provider." But Moore's Law provides the solution: costs decline while demand and usage explode
Microsoft's GitHub Copilot: The Biggest Miss in Tech?
The conversation took a brutal turn when examining Microsoft's competitive position. Despite having GitHub (massive distribution) and launching Copilot first, they're losing ground to Cursor.
"Is GitHub just a massive miss for Microsoft?" O'Driscoll asked pointedly. "If you're sitting in that meeting, you're going, 'Oh my god, we had the head start, we had the runway, and we've let someone come up from behind and seemingly surpass us.'"
The answer was unequivocal: "Yeah, it's a mistake because whenever you start... when you're Microsoft, if you start with a monopoly and you fast forward 3 years and someone exists, by definition, you screwed up."
This extends beyond just developer tools. Microsoft's AI strategy appears scattered—trying to compete with everyone from Lovable to Cursor to Anthropic, rather than dominating where they already have advantages.
The Death of Traditional B2B Software Excitement
One of the most sobering moments came during the Figma IPO discussion. Despite representing potentially $30B in venture returns, the market barely noticed.
"September 2022... 10,000 people talked about nothing but Figma... people's jaw dropped... fast forward to today and... in my ecosystem, people aren't talking about it," Lemkin observed.
The zeitgeist has completely shifted. Even S-tier B2B software companies can't capture imagination the way AI companies do. "B2B software used to be boring. Maybe it's super boring again," Lemkin concluded.
O'Driscoll added crucial context: "By the time you get to an IPO... you probably are half a tech cycle or a tech cycle behind. It's terrifying... our holding period is now longer than the tech cycle."
The Hyperscaler War: Microsoft's and Google's Surprising Victories?
"Five years ago Amazon built the category and was the dominant one... Google was nowhere to the point where there were credible stories about them getting out of cloud," O'Driscoll noted. "Fast forward to this quarter, Google's nailed it. and Microsoft just crushed it."
Stebbings made the trade call: "You have to buy one and you have to short one... buy Google short Amazon."
The reasoning? Google has its own TPUs, improving execution, and the advantage of underestimation—plus unlimited demand that benefits all players.
Apple's Existential AI Question
The panel was particularly harsh on Apple's AI performance—or lack thereof.
"Apple doesn't even have a product that works," O'Driscoll stated bluntly, comparing them unfavorably to Google's execution, Microsoft's OpenAI partnership, and Meta's aggressive talent acquisition.
The team posed the board-level question: "Do you have a management team that's too old? At some point do you say you just have a bunch of folks who aren't figuring it out and do you make a change?"
However, they acknowledged Apple's potential defensive position: collecting taxes on AI revenue flowing through the App Store, similar to their Google search deal. "Maybe they just collect their tax that way," O'Driscoll suggested.
The Capital Consumption Question: When Does It End?
Perhaps the most thought-provoking discussion centered on AI's seemingly infinite capital appetite.
Drawing from historical parallels, O'Driscoll shared research showing current AI capex at 1.2% of GDP—already exceeding the dot-com boom's 1.1% but well below the railroad boom's 6% peak.
"The pleasing thing about that answer is it allows both parties to continue to feel great," he observed. Bears can worry about exceeding dot-com levels; bulls can point to being nowhere near railroad levels.
But the fundamental question remains: "How long can you continue investing 600 billion a year against a $30 billion growing revenue line?"
Lemkin offered the practical perspective: "There's unlimited demand to reduce headcount and grow revenue... the answer is AI."
Key Takeaways
For VCs: The old partnership model is under siege. Top talent with strong brands can now raise massive solo funds. Speed of deployment increasingly equals relevance. Traditional LP discipline is being selectively abandoned—and rewarded.
For Operators: Developer tool pricing assumptions are fundamentally wrong. The real TAM is 50x what most assume. Every great developer will consume nearly unlimited AI resources. Budget accordingly.
For Investors: We're in the early innings of AI monetization. Traditional software companies face a zeitgeist challenge even when executing well. The hyperscaler war is far from over, with surprising winners emerging.
For Founders: Distribution advantages are being disrupted across categories. Even Microsoft with GitHub can lose to scrappy startups. Brand still matters, but execution at speed matters more.
Quotable Moments
On venture partnerships: "If you are going to leave a fund and you can and you have a hot hand better to do it early... staying longer doesn't help." - Lemkin
On market dynamics: "The only thing that's true about this job over the medium term is you have to be right." - O'Driscoll
On AI demand: "Our agents don't sleep, Harry. This is the thing I didn't get until I ran like four different AIs for SaaStr." - Lemkin
On execution: "I don't think these guys are too powerful. If anything, I think they're a bunch of rich people on the back foot behind the new trend, desperately trying to catch up." - O'Driscoll
On capital markets: "Sometimes the market can stay euphoric longer than you can stay solvent." - O'Driscoll
On the future: "Everything does not work. But I'm just going to commit one other point... we're all going to be coding 24/7 with our agents." - Lemkin
The venture world is being rewritten in real-time. The winners will be those who recognize which rules still matter—and which ones are already obsolete. As Lemkin noted, "We're vibing now." The question is: are you vibing with the right frequency?
Founder @ Rise Productive | Content Creator & Agency Owner
3 天前Shopify gets it. Top performers burning 10K credits monthly proves AI isn't just an add-on anymore.