Sajal Singh is a Consulting Partner at Kyndryl Nordics, Global Innovation Expert for UN Compact. Board member, IE Business School, Spain.
The generative AI boom has unleashed a torrent of new startups, each promising to disrupt industries with the power of artificial intelligence. Yet beneath the surface of this innovation wave, a troubling reality is emerging: the overwhelming majority of these companies are little more than “wrappers”—thin user interfaces built atop the APIs of OpenAI, Anthropic and other foundational model providers. This structural weakness is not just a quirk of early-stage innovation; it is a systemic flaw that I believe will soon trigger a mass extinction event across the AI startup ecosystem.
OpenAI’s API pricing structure exemplifies how platform economics dramatically reduce barriers to entry for AI wrapper companies. OpenAI’s token-based pricing model creates unprecedented accessibility for startups. The GPT-4.1 nano model costs only $0.10 per 1 million input tokens, with a minimal $5 credit purchase requirement that keeps barriers extraordinarily low. This represents an estimated 8x to 20x cost advantage compared to building equivalent infrastructure on AWS instances.
It’s well known that one can literally build entire AI applications with single API calls, as one analysis found: “If you opened DevTools and peeked into the network tab, you’d see the product’s entire brain in a single JSON payload.” This technical simplicity, combined with Microsoft Azure’s compute partnerships providing additional economies of scale, means that the fundamental infrastructure costs that traditionally protected established players have virtually disappeared.
The platform model transforms what were once capital-intensive AI capabilities into pay-as-you-go services. Studies show that startups can achieve functionality that would have needed millions in research and development investment for the cost of basic API usage. This democratization effect is so pronounced that venture capitalists noted funding patterns where companies received significant investment despite having no proprietary technology beyond API integration.
Easy market entry leads to rapid proliferation of competitors. Multiple sources document the emergence of what one analyst termed “one startup with 10,000 skins”—identical companies offering superficially different interfaces to the same underlying AI capabilities.
The scale of market saturation is remarkable. In one documented example, 73 PDF chat wrapper companies launched in the same week, all offering identical functionality. This pattern repeated across categories, with investigators finding examples like “GPT for doctors,” “GPT for lawyers,” “GPT for resumes” or “GPT for sales emails.” Each category spawned dozens of identical companies, creating what researchers describe as “content bombing”—the constant bombardment of consumers with similar offerings.
Venture capital amplified this oversaturation. Between 2022 and 2024, investors “weren’t asking hard questions” and funded companies that were just API calls wrapped in user interfaces. The same source noted that founders “didn’t need a backend, or a roadmap, or users,” just a ChatGPT wrapper and claims about “revolutionizing workflows.”
AI Wrappers Lead To Consumer Choice Overload
The claim that consumers “face many choices” understates the severity of the choice overload phenomenon. Research from behavioral economics provides robust evidence that excessive options create decision paralysis and reduce overall market participation.
The foundational jam study demonstrates the core dynamic: When consumers faced 24 jam varieties versus six varieties, the larger selection attracted more initial interest but resulted in dramatically lower purchase rates—3% versus 30%. This 10x difference in conversion rates illustrates why market oversaturation can be counterproductive for the entire ecosystem.
In digital markets, choice overload effects are even more pronounced. A study of more than 2,000 professionals found that 27% of conversion losses occur on e-commerce sites when search results yield too many results, with no option of narrowing the search parameters further. The average consumer’s attention span has decreased over the years, making the problem increasingly severe.
Studies of online recommender systems found that as the number of recommended products increases, consumers’ likelihood of purchasing first increases and then decreases, with the optimal range typically between six (as seen in the jam study) and 10 options. The research extends to critical decisions, such as 401(k) enrollment, where every 10 additional investment fund options reduced participation by approximately 2%.
One can see why AI companies create an abundance of choices, resulting in most AI wrapper startups failing. Given my specialization, I think this is likely to happen because of the low defensibility of wrapper companies.
AI Wrappers As Case Studies
If not choice, systematic “platform encroachment” allows foundation model providers to absorb successful wrapper use cases. OpenAI eliminated four major wrapper categories within 18 months of identifying market demand. For example, Jasper AI saw its valuation cut by 20% after ChatGPT launched competing features; down-round frequency for AI apps rose to 11.4% in 2024 as investors reassessed wrapper sustainability, and I’ve seen multiple documented cases show wrapper companies shutting down within weeks of OpenAI feature updates.
AI markets exhibit strong winner-take-all characteristics due to network effects and economies of scale. Between 2021 and 2024, the top AI companies “have achieved 1.5 times higher revenue growth, 1.6 times greater shareholder returns, and 1.4 times higher returns on invested capital.”
Platform providers like OpenAI may deliberately encourage wrapper proliferation as a form of market research, allowing thousands of companies to experiment and then integrating successful patterns natively, capturing the value while eliminating the intermediaries.
My analysis validates every component of the causal chain: Platform economies of scale make wrapper creation trivially easy, leading to market oversaturation that overwhelms consumers and creates selection pressure so severe that 90% to 99% of companies are mathematically certain to fail. This is a predictable outcome of platform economics combined with consumer psychology principles, representing the natural evolution of markets built on rented intelligence.
The AI wrapper apocalypse is already here. Companies building sustainable AI businesses must recognize that the platform model has fundamentally changed competitive dynamics. Success requires owning something irreplaceable: proprietary data, deep integrations or network effects that create genuine barriers to entry.
The race isn’t to be first to market—it’s to build something that can’t be wrapped, absorbed or replicated by the next platform update. In the AI economy, being a wrapper isn’t a strategy—it’s a countdown to obsolescence.
Forbes Business Development Council is an invitation-only community for sales and biz dev executives. Do I qualify?