AI sticker shock hits corporate America

(axios.com)

60 points | by 1vuio0pswjnm7 1 hour ago

11 comments

  • Arodex 24 minutes ago
    >Corporate leaders are starting to question whether soaring AI spending is delivering meaningful returns.

    We should start to question whether soaring CEO salary spending is delivering meaningful results.

  • CuriouslyC 37 minutes ago
    This is almost entirely on Anthropic and the stupid C suite people trying to push TokenMaxxing. GPT5.5 is much more token efficient, other models are much cheaper, and if used in moderation rather than than trying to get everyone to OpenClaw 24/7 with token leaderboards, it's much more economical.

    Also ironically, a lot of GenZ and young Millenials who were already bitter at their employers have used the tokenmaxxing push to sabotage the AI rollouts by burning tokens on stupid shit. It seems to be working.

    • SupLockDef 25 minutes ago
      Are you saying that making a leaderboard of who is spending the most is going to be expensive?

      They couldn't see that coming, but for sure they can predict how the future will be when it's time to sell their "visions" of the world.

      Meanwhile, sheep's are going to believe and max their token usage with their own wallet. "You are so be left behind if you're not".

      It's a mass psychosis. The only winners here are the hardware manufacturers, like nvidia for instance.

      • kombookcha 19 minutes ago
        The other day I had to read a C-suite guy share how he had an epiphany that spending more tokens did not linearly align with more useful features being output by the teams. He was describing it as this breakthrough moment for him, as if it wasn't glaringly obvious that making the KPI "spend more tokens" would result in inefficient token spending, not massive value for the customer.

        It's baffling how these people have entirely shut their ears to all the obvious warnings about this, and are now congratulating themselves for their slightly less psychotic outlook and pivoting to blaming the workers for inefficient usage, after specifically forcing them to tokenmaxx.

        • Arodex 10 minutes ago
          >It's baffling how these people have entirely shut their ears to all the obvious warnings about this, and are now congratulating themselves for their slightly less psychotic outlook and pivoting to blaming the workers for inefficient usage, after specifically forcing them to tokenmaxx.

          It's not baffling. They are a caste, wholly insulated from the consequences of their own actions.

          Almost every company is run in a basic dictatorial way. We almost never discuss it, when there is a wide corpus of political Science analysing the pros and cons of governance models that certainly puts it at the bottom.

          • 59percentmore 2 minutes ago
            >They are a caste

            Sometimes literally.

          • kombookcha 5 minutes ago
            I should have perhaps said "galling" instead.

            After ejecting anyone who spoke out or were even publicly hesistant against the hard swerve into "just do maximal amounts of AI stuff above all else", they're now surprised to find that everyone that remains is dutifully excited about the emperor's new clothes, and yet he remains mysteriously exposed to the breeze.

        • cluckindan 13 minutes ago
          You get what you measure.
    • qsort 3 minutes ago
      I'm with you that people are insanely hyped about Claude Code in particular when e.g. Codex isn't far behind (and with recent models I actually prefer it).

      But I'm going to need a citation for this:

      > a lot of GenZ and young Millenials who were already bitter at their employers have used the tokenmaxxing push to sabotage the AI

      The 3 people on reddit doing this don't even register on a company budget. What seems more plausible to me is that budgets were calibrated to spending before agents were actually useful, and late '25/early '26 changed the pattern significantly.

    • throwatdem12311 27 minutes ago
      I’m an “old millenial” and the excessive burning of tokens will continue until working conditions improve.
      • voidfunc 20 minutes ago
        Working conditions are fine, I simply am not incentivized to be efficient with tokens.
        • throwatdem12311 14 minutes ago
          Yeah, everything is fine until you don’t want to use AI for something because it sucks at that task and then you end up on a PiP because your token burn is low. Why the f*ck are AI Token Use Leaderboards even a thing.

          Surely there wouldn’t be malicious compliance by people that would prefer to use the right tool for the job instead of having this crap shoved down our throats by management by threat of termination.

    • mayhemducks 19 minutes ago
      Excessive token burning as a tactic to annoy your employer probably does the opposite - it probably makes your employer money.

      The more tokens you burn, the more demand for hardware there will be. More demand for hardware means higher stock prices -> more money in your employer's pocket.

      The only question is how long that can last. If taken to an extreme, the output of the AI will get worse over time, and if it gets bad enough, for long enough, people will use it less and less, and demand will slowly evaporate.

      • customguy 6 minutes ago
        > The more tokens you burn, the more demand for hardware there will be. More demand for hardware means higher stock prices -> more money in your employer's pocket.

        If you work for NVIDIA, sure, but otherwise, this makes no sense to me.

    • 6stringmerc 27 minutes ago
      Counterpoint: based on a lot of anecdotes here, the most likely people to burn tokens aren’t GenZ but managers using ChatGPT to respond to questions or otherwise as an outsourcing of their job. There aren’t enough GenZ in the workforce to back your claim in my opinion.

      Token efficiency where instead of the AI burning money at 1:3 instead of 1:5 isn’t quite a winning argument.

      • CuriouslyC 11 minutes ago
        There's the cost to do productive work, and the proportion of work which is actually productive.

        GPT5.5 medium is ~20% the cost of Opus and 27% the cost of Sonnet on a task by task basis. That's a material difference.

      • fullshark 19 minutes ago
        There's no way managers using LLMs to answer emails are burning tokens at a comparable rate someone trying to utilize inference in production systems is.
    • kleiba2 28 minutes ago
      Citation needed.
  • Balinares 3 minutes ago
    Overheard recently: "Thanks to AI we're producing more code and more MRs, faster than ever, but the milestones aren't getting hit any sooner. Actually the opposite, if anything."

    I wonder how widespread that phenomenon is. Perhaps it's no wonder the prominent actors are trying to rush to IPO...

  • Arodex 21 minutes ago
    Just a week ago, Anthropic barely breaking even was hailed as AI companies being close to profitability much earlier than forecast.

    In fact it is all smoke and mirrors, pure mania from C-level executives out of their depth trying to one-up each other with company money, and they aren't even close.

  • swader999 18 minutes ago
    "An AI consultant tells Axios one of their clients recently spent half a billion dollars in a single month after failing to put usage limits on Claude licenses for employees." Like physically, how could this even happen?
    • layer8 1 minute ago
      This could happen with a large number of integrations or agent swarms working 24/7 with high throughput and long contexts.
    • pjc50 9 minutes ago
      Agents. An agent is a system for spinning up processes that use tokens, talking to other processes that use tokens.

      I wonder how many megawatts that waste represented. Just one guy, worse than a small air force of private jets.

  • lelanthran 4 minutes ago
    I am Jack's total lack of surprise :-/
  • Spide_r 40 minutes ago
  • autoexec 11 minutes ago
    Just wait until companies are dependent on on it. When their employees can't think without it. When their AI generated codebase is such a mess they'd need a rewrite to understand it without AI. When they've got AI embedded in all their internal processes and tools. Then massive price hikes will come because they've been bent over a barrel and they'll have no alternative that isn't at least as painful in the short-term as letting the AI company fuck them. The long term won't matter then because any company capable of seeing past the short term wouldn't let themselves get into that position in the first place.
  • mystraline 2 minutes ago
    Well, if AI has a massive sticker shock attributed, so we should target the high value roles and should save money, right?

    So im looking at CEO, CTO, CFO, and all the chief-something-officer. If LLMs are that totally amazing at thinking, then we should be targeting upper management, not the workers.

    That would save a LOT of money for the shareholders! /snark

    We all know why they wont.

  • cynicalsecurity 41 minutes ago
    > Instead, they should focus on using AI to drive revenue.

    There is a complete disconnect between wages of employees and company's revenue => Why aren't employees working towards revenue? What a mystery. Children, let's help Elmo solve this mystery.

    And then random mass layoffs to make numbers for shareholders look great in quarterly reports. Surely this motivates people work to their fullest potential and to care for company's revenue.

    • roxolotl 24 minutes ago
      Even better there’s a complete disconnect between revenues and metrics we use to measure productivity. Corporate wants to believe there’s numbers you can use to measure knowledge workers like widget makers where there’s really not much that’s effective beyond revenue.
  • cmiles8 20 minutes ago
    Playing out in company after company right now:

    CEOs: “Get me some of that GenAI”

    CTO: “OK, we have all the GenAI”

    CEOs: “Employees, it’s AI or bust”

    Employees: Tokenmax

    CFO: “Um, this is costing a ton and we’re not seeing savings or efficiency materialize.”

    CEO: “Are we getting any value out of this?”

    COO: “Not really, and frankly I’m getting annoyed at all the AI slop turning up all over.”

    CEO: “OK, well, let’s do a big layoff and then I’ll just say it was because of AI. Hopefully folks won’t blame me for the mess and I’ll just talk about how amazing AI is.”