AI has become almost impossible to miss in the startup world. It shows up in products, business plans, presentations and, increasingly, investment pitches. But when the same technology is being mentioned by one founder after another, simply saying that a startup uses AI may not make much of an impression.Zerodha co-founder and CEO Nithin Kamath has now shared his frustration with this trend. According to Kamath, he regularly sees investment decks that put AI at the centre of their opening pitch. For him, that is no longer enough to make a startup look different.His post on X has since sparked a conversation among users about whether founders should stop selling AI as a feature and instead explain what their businesses actually do differently.
Nithin Kamath calls out repetitive AI pitches
Kamath said he receives a large number of investment decks that begin with claims about using AI.“The number of investment decks I get leading with ‘we use AI’ is ridiculous,” Kamath wrote.He said the repeated pattern has become so common that it now affects how he reacts to such presentations. Kamath wrote that it “automatically makes my eyes roll” and said he had “almost stopped looking at them”.The point he was making was not that startups should avoid AI. Instead, he questioned why its use is being presented as though it is automatically a major advantage.
‘AI is just table stakes now’
Kamath’s view is that AI has become common enough to be treated as a basic part of many startups rather than a unique selling point.“AI is just table stakes now,” he said.He then used a simple comparison to explain why founders should not treat the technology itself as something special.“Bragging that your product uses AI is like bragging that you take a bath every day,” Kamath wrote, adding that it is “not a differentiator”.In other words, telling an investor that a product uses AI does not, by itself, explain why that product deserves attention.
AI-made decks are another concern
Kamath also pointed to the growing use of AI to create polished-looking presentations.He said this could make it even harder for founders to stand apart if they rely on the same generic language and presentation style.“Especially now that AI has democratized the ability to generate ‘nice-looking’ decks, the last thing you want to do is say the exact same generic things as every other founder using the exact same tools,” he wrote.His concern is that a visually attractive presentation can still feel ordinary if the message inside it sounds like every other startup pitch.
What people on X said
Kamath’s comments quickly led to a discussion on X, with several users agreeing that simply using AI does not say much about a startup.One user wrote, “Honestly, ‘we use AI’ is starting to feel like saying ‘we have a website’. The interesting part is what the AI actually lets you do that you couldn’t do before. That’s the part I’d want to hear about.”Another user commented, “So the bubble finally burst. Hopefully I hear less AI AI in future.”A third user was far more critical of the technology, saying, “AI is steaming pile of shit which just smell good enough but no one wants to taste it. AI is Biggest scam ever in the world. Trillion dollar worth of fraud,”Another user focused on the quality of startup presentations and wrote, “I believe you on this. If the deck is pretty and could belong to any founder, they offloaded the thinking and kept the shine. It even does the opposite impact on the seriousness and sincerity of the founder towards their solution if anyone can tell that its generic but pretty,”
Not everyone agreed with the reaction
While several users supported Kamath’s point, one person questioned whether reacting negatively to AI-heavy pitches could also have a downside.“Wondering if you missed some genuinely good pitches because of the eye roll,” one user wrote.Another commenter said the focus should remain on the problem a startup is trying to solve rather than on AI itself.“The goal of a startup should be to first solve a problem. AI is just a tool. If using the tool helps solve the problem better, then it should definitely be used. Otherwise, it shouldn’t be used at all,” they said.Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available information and social media posts. The views and comments mentioned are those of the respective individuals and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Times of India.Thumb image: X
