Build-vs-Buy Just Became a Real Question Again
A coffee chain deciding it can out-build IBM isn't a demo win or a vendor obituary. It's a question most enterprises still aren't willing to ask themselves.
The right question in front of most enterprises isn't which AI vendor to buy. It's whether buying the platform is even the move on the piece of work that actually matters to them.
A coffee chain just answered it. It looked at the layer closest to its business, decided it could own that layer better than rent it, and pulled IBM and Microsoft tools to build its own. That's a procurement decision, not a technology verdict.
IBM didn't fail on its merits here. The buyer got good enough to build. Those are different stories, and conflating them is exactly what the NYT op-ed asking whether we made the "wrong bet on Big AI" does. That's a thesis hunting for evidence. The enterprises that win from here will build selectively around any vendor, large or open, wherever the value actually lives.
Nobody should pitch an AI project. They should pitch how technology creates value. Who cares if it's AI or not?
Here's my caution to myself: one contract isn't a trend. A single procurement swing is strong signal, not proof the pendulum has moved for everyone. Plenty of enterprises that copy this will build the wrong layer, badly, and spend more than a license ever cost.
The discipline isn't "build." It's knowing which layer is worth owning and which is worth renting. "We took this from three days to fifteen minutes on the workflow that defines us" is a reason to build. "We want to own our AI" is not. Most buyers still can't tell those apart, and that's the real gap.
Sources
Want to talk about this?
Get in touchMore on AI
The Token Bill Is the Audit
Everyone measured how often people used the tools. Nobody measured whether anything got better. Now the invoices are settling that argument.
The Embargo Is Building Its Own Competitor
Cut a lab off from the best chips and it doesn't stall. It goes vertical. And the enterprises that ruled out Chinese models over access risk should notice which direction that risk is now pointing.
The Summary Is Not the Source
An AI summary called a hotel being sued over hygiene 'spotless.' The same layer is reading your vendor risk reports, and nobody priced the difference.