OpenAI's Crossroads: Finding a Moat in the Midst of a Valuation Bubble and Identity Crisis
OpenAI's Crossroads: Finding a Moat in the Midst of a Valuation Bubble and Identity Crisis
When a company's valuation is soaring, yet its user base is launching a "fire the CEO" campaign on social media, this disconnect usually indicates some deep structural problems.
Recently, discussions about OpenAI on X/Twitter have presented an extreme dichotomy: on one hand, SoftBank's continued investment and valuation expectations of tens of billions of dollars, and on the other hand, user outrage over the removal of GPT-4o, Elon Musk's fierce criticism, and the strong encirclement from Chinese competitor DeepSeek.
If we shift our focus away from daily stock price fluctuations and model benchmarks, we will find that OpenAI is in a typical "innovator's dilemma." This is not just about technology or funding, but a strategic crisis about identity, business moats, and the future AI ecosystem.
Loss of Emotional Assets and the Trust Crisis of "ClosedAI"
In business analysis, we often say that user habits are the deepest moat. However, OpenAI seems to be filling this gap with its own hands.
The biggest controversy recently stems from OpenAI's adjustments to the GPT-4o model. Many users on X have expressed strong dissatisfaction, with some even using extreme terms like "ruined our lives." This may sound exaggerated, but it reveals a key fact: for a large number of C-end users, the relationship they have established with AI is not just a tool-based calling relationship, but also includes some emotional dependence and deep workflow embedding.
When users shout "ClosedAI, give me back GPT-4o" and include the #FireSamAltman tag, it marks a certain collapse of OpenAI's brand image. As one commentator put it, OpenAI is "completely offending the consumer end and destroying the most precious core assets."
In the startup phase, this "betrayal" of early core users may be regarded as the cost of transformation, but for a giant with a valuation of hundreds of billions of dollars, this is tantamount to economic suicide. More fatally, this trust crisis is not limited to ordinary users.
As one of the co-founders, Elon Musk recently launched a new round of public opinion offensive against OpenAI, saying that its valuation "seems too high" and accusing it of being not only "extremely closed" but even using "dirty tricks." Although Musk's remarks are tinged with personal grievances, the narrative he pointed out that "OpenAI is not worthy of its name (from non-profit open source to closed profit-seeking)" is becoming an irrefutable accusation in the mainstream public opinion field. When the brand name itself becomes a satire, this identity crisis will seriously hinder its progress in policy regulation and public image.
Open Source Wolf Pack and the "20x Cost Difference" of Dimensionality Reduction
If the internal trust crisis is a chronic poison, then external competition is a direct dimensionality reduction strike.
Twitter user @Jackkk pointed out a phenomenon that makes Wall Street uneasy: "Chinese models are not only 20 times cheaper, but also open source." This is not groundless. Chinese AI models, represented by DeepSeek, are impacting the closed walls built by OpenAI and Anthropic in an extremely aggressive manner.
Regarding DeepSeek, there are two completely different narratives in the public opinion field. OpenAI accuses it of copying American models through "distillation" technology, while the other side praises it as "free AI not controlled by the United States." Regardless of the controversy over the technical source, an undeniable economic fact is that open source models are achieving performance close to SOTA (State of the Art) at extremely low marginal costs.
This constitutes the "unbundling" and "commoditization" trend that Benedict Evans often mentions. When intelligence becomes as cheap and ubiquitous as electricity, the business model of relying on selling closed-source API subscriptions will face huge price pressure. If open source models such as DeepSeek can provide 90% of the performance of GPT-4 at only 5% of the price, then for most developers and enterprise users, migration will be a matter of time.
OpenAI's current strategy seems to be "fighting on six or seven fronts at the same time" - it wants to do AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), consumer-grade hardware, and deal with Microsoft's cooperative and competitive relationship, while also defending against flank attacks from the open source camp. As the comment said, it does not seem to have achieved a decisive victory on any front.## Proxy Wars and the Future of Agents
In the face of a commoditization crisis at the model layer, OpenAI's next bet is clearly on "Agent".
Recently, OpenAI acquired the team from Multi (formerly OpenClaw), aiming to bring Agent to the masses. As industry observer @pascal_bornet put it: "The next AI war is not about models, but about Agents. Models generate text, Agents generate actions."
This is a correct strategic shift, but extremely difficult to execute. Agents require extremely high system permissions, a stable environment, and deep user trust. And this is precisely where OpenAI's weaknesses lie:
- Privacy and Security Concerns: When the US Department of Defense announced its cooperation with OpenAI to deploy ChatGPT to the Pentagon, while it demonstrated enterprise-level capabilities, it also exacerbated some users' concerns about data privacy. Deeply integrating Agent into operating systems or browsers requires users to grant extremely high trust permissions, and OpenAI's current volatile trust foundation may not be able to support this leap.
- Competitive Relationship with Microsoft: Musk predicted that "OpenAI will swallow Microsoft whole." While radical, this reveals the potential conflict in their business models. Microsoft hopes to integrate AI capabilities through Copilot and sell them to businesses, while if OpenAI directly reaches users through Agent, it will inevitably compete directly with its largest financial backer.
Conclusion: Finding a New Narrative
OpenAI's current projected huge losses in 2026 are not simply a technical bottleneck, but the growing pains of a business model in transition.
It is trying to transform from a "non-profit research institution" into a "closed-source commercial giant", but it is also encountering a low-cost siege from the open-source community; it is trying to establish a consumer-level emotional connection, but it is also rudely cutting off this connection in product iterations. It is eating Microsoft's lunch, and it is also being devoured by open-source wolf packs from China.
At this stage, OpenAI needs more than just a stronger GPT-5. It needs to re-answer the most essential question: In this era where intelligence is about to be ubiquitous and marginal costs are approaching zero, who exactly is OpenAI? Is it an expensive White House guest, or a smart assistant for the masses?If this identity crisis cannot be resolved, even the highest valuation is just a tower built on sand. After all, in this era of rapid technological equalization, moats are never built on model parameters, but on irreplaceable value networks and user trust.
