Presentation
2026

SaaS
Threats

What changes when AI becomes the interface, the operator, and the builder.

Core idea: fewer humans, more agents, near-zero integration, replace-not-retrofit.
Thesis
Why SaaS gets pressured

The SaaS default assumptions break.

  • Seats ↓ because fewer people need to touch the UI.
  • Usage ↑ because agents do more work, more often.
  • Integration time → ~0 becomes an expectation, not a bonus.
  • Replacement becomes cheaper than fitting legacy screens.
Reframe
1N

From “one UI for all” to “generated surfaces per workflow”.

The competitive axis moves from features to time-to-value and adaptation speed.

Six threats, one story: SaaS must become agent-native.
Threat 1
Pricing model pressure
Users & user-based pricing vs usage

Fewer users. More usage.

People will have many alternatives to “log into the app”. They will delegate work to representatives (agents).

  • Seat counts compress while work volume grows.
  • Value shifts from UI access to outcomes delivered.
Signal

Human seats become a weak proxy for value.

Agents are the new “user”: fewer identities, higher task throughput.

Seats ↓ • Tasks/Actions ↑ • Calls ↑

Implication: seat pricing needs an agent-compatible counterpart (usage/outcome/budget).
Threat 2
Workflow mismatch tax
Fit vs integration cost

The common denominator is expensive.

SaaS often stays rigid to serve everyone. The cost is paid with the hardest coin: employee focus and time.

  • Business fit is expected, not negotiated.
  • Integration time is expected to be minimal (or zero).
Reality check

“Fit” without friction becomes the product.

If adoption requires internal project management, the buyer will ask: “why not generate it?”

Threat 3
Speed advantage shifts
Shorter time-to-market for new efforts

Skip 80% of “software”.

When setup, configuration, dashboards, and reporting can be generated or skipped, teams focus on the core business without legacy constraints.

  • New efforts ship faster with less scaffolding.
  • Customization time collapses.
Competing with

Internal “micro-apps” built on demand.

SaaS loses if “new workflow” means waiting on a quarterly roadmap.

Threat 4
Flexibility becomes table stakes
Dynamic vs flexible

Flexibility used to cost a fortune.

Businesses must keep reacting to change. Paying for “flexible configuration” becomes redundant when AI can generate screens, forms, and reports ad hoc, or not generate UI at all.

  • Dynamic UI beats “build it once” flexibility.
  • Workflow-first beats module-first.
Shift

From configurable product

To generative product

The question becomes: “Can your system adapt today?” not “Can it be configured this quarter?”

Threat 5
Hosting differentiation erodes
Infrastructure unified vs complex

Compute gets portable.

GPUs are GPUs. AI can run on a local device, a small on-prem farm, or a datacenter. Some specialization in hosting becomes irrelevant.

  • Latency constraints change: humans wait seconds; agents can wait for callbacks.
  • Deployment options expand: edge, office, cloud, hybrid.
Example

UI user: “must respond now”

Agent worker: “wake me up when it’s done”

This changes which infra optimizations matter, and where compute can live.

Threat 6
Delivery economics change
Whole components/apps vs line-by-line

Replace beats retrofit.

The effective marginal cost of creating software trends toward zero. Replacing a screen while keeping the API can be cheaper than fitting the old UI.

  • Components can be generated end-to-end.
  • Maintainability shifts from code purity to AI practices and skills.
New moat

Consistency of output, not the number of lines.

Organizations will differentiate by how reliably they can produce correct, secure, maintainable software on demand.

So what?
Second-order effects

What these threats break in traditional SaaS

Product
  • One-size UI roadmaps
  • “Configurable forever” architectures
  • Feature parity as strategy
Go-to-market
  • Seat-based expansion logic
  • Professional services as a necessity
  • Long onboarding as normal
If time-to-value isn’t measured in hours, someone will undercut you with generated alternatives.
Response
How to stay ahead

How SaaS can respond

  • Agent-native pricing: outcomes, usage budgets, task bundles.
  • Zero-integration defaults: import, mapping, migration in minutes.
  • Generated surfaces: UI and reports per workflow, not per persona.
  • Composable core: strong APIs, events, permissions, audit.
  • Portable runtime: cloud + hybrid + edge story that is real.
  • AI production system: guardrails, tests, review, and reuse.
North star

“Minutes to value.”

If a customer can’t be successful without weeks of configuration, the product will be competed away.

TTFV • Integration minutes • Tasks completed • Error rate

Close
Summary

Summary

SaaS doesn’t disappear. It gets forced to evolve.

  • Seats compress, usage expands.
  • Fit and time-to-value dominate.
  • Generated software beats rigid workflows.
  • Infra portability increases buyer leverage.
  • Replace-not-retrofit changes delivery economics.
Q&A