OpenAI at a Crossroads: When B2C Expansion Questions Its B2B Strategy Core

OpenAI's recent announcement regarding the integration of a shopping feature into ChatGPT raises questions about its commercial strategy and poses a fundamental question: who is OpenAI really targeting, the more lucrative B2B segment, or directly the general public (B2C)? It's important to distinguish this dichotomy: while the user interface aimed at the general public is a crucial adoption lever for widespread democratization, the true financial windfall for OpenAI remains, to date, the B2B segment, particularly through the commercialization of its APIs to businesses.

So far, OpenAI seemed, despite appearances, to have positioned itself primarily as a provider of cutting-edge technology intended to be integrated by other companies into innovative solutions. Many startups and large companies have adopted ChatGPT and other OpenAI products as the essential technological backbone of their commercial offerings. However, this new shopping feature directly accessible via the public user interface illustrates how OpenAI continues to visibly expand its reach towards the end consumer. This strategy towards individuals is therefore probably not an end in itself, but rather a strategic means to strengthen the massive adoption of its technology and further establish its status as an indispensable player in the market.

This strategy might seem appealing at first glance: directly reach consumers, expand AI visibility, and democratize its daily applications. However, this approach is not without risk. Indeed, by multiplying features and directly attacking markets traditionally reserved for its own B2B partners and clients, OpenAI could gradually weaken its ecosystem, or even cannibalize the client companies that had trusted its technology to build their own solutions offering recommendation or online assistance overlays.

OpenAI thus seems to be playing a complex balancing act: expanding its services and appealing to the general public while remaining indispensable to client companies. Certainly, this approach is facilitated by the hegemony and significant lead OpenAI currently enjoys, which reduces the immediate risks of too penalizing direct competition for its ecosystem. Nonetheless, this strategic choice raises questions about the long-term viability of an economic model in which the technology provider could also become a direct competitor to client companies.

In the long run, this dynamic could encourage partner companies to seek or develop alternative solutions, less dependent on an entity that could, at any moment, encroach on their territory. While these clients would have an interest in being reassured about the strategic limits OpenAI might set for itself, the latter has no interest, at least publicly, in curbing its own appetite in the face of increasingly aggressive competition. In this context, it's hard to imagine OpenAI voluntarily giving up future growth opportunities, confirming the impression that nothing can truly curb the appetite of this technological giant.