Investors have been pouring billions into AI companies over the past few years, as the technology continues to hold sway in the Valley and thus the world. But not all AI companies are grabbing investor attention.

Indeed, even as it seems every company these days is rebranding to include “AI” in its name, some startup ideas are just no longer in favor with investors. TechCrunch spoke with VCs to learn what investors aren’t looking for in AI software-as-a-service startups anymore.

Popular SaaS categories for investors now include startups building AI-native infrastructure, vertical SaaS with proprietary data, systems of action (those helping users complete tasks), and platforms deeply embedded in mission-critical workflows, according to Aaron Holiday, a managing partner at 645 Ventures. 

But he also gave a list of companies that are considered quite boring to investors these days: Startups building thin workflow layers, generic horizontal tools, light product management, and surface-level analytics — basically, anything an AI agent can now do. 

Abdul Abdirahman, an investor at the firm F Prime, added that generic vertical software “without proprietary data moats” is no longer popular, and Igor Ryabenky, a founder and managing partner at AltaIR Capital, went deeper on that point. He said investors aren’t interested in anything, really, that doesn’t have much product depth. 

“If your differentiation lives mostly in UI [user interface] and automation, that’s no longer enough,” he said. “The barrier to entry has dropped, which makes building a real moat much harder.” 

New companies entering the market now need to build around “real workflow ownership and a clear understanding of the problem from day one,” he said.  “Massive codebases are no longer an advantage. What matters more is speed, focus, and the ability to adapt quickly. Pricing also needs to be flexible: rigid per-seat models will be harder to defend, while consumption-based models make more sense in this environment.” 

Jake Saper, a general partner at Emergence Capital, also had thoughts on ownership. To him, the differences between Cursor and Claude Code are the “canary in the coal mine.” 

“One owns the developer’s workflow, the other just executes the task,” Saper continued. “Developers are increasingly choosing the execution over process.” 

He said any product dealing with “workflow stickiness” — meaning trying to attract as many human customers as possible to continuously use the product — might find themselves in an uphill battle as agents takeover the workflow.

“Pre-Claude, getting humans to do their jobs inside your software was a powerful moat, but if agents are doing the work, who cares about human workflow?” he told TechCrunch.

He also thinks integrations are becoming less popular, especially as Anthropic’s model context protocol (MCP) makes it easier than ever to connect AI models to external data and systems. This means someone doesn’t need to download multiple integrations or build their own customer integrations; they can just use the MCP. 

“Being the connector used to be a moat,” Saper said. “Soon, it’ll be a utility.”

Also, no longer en vogue include the “workflow automation and task management tools that enable the coordination of human work become less necessary if, over time, agents just execute the tasks,” Abdirahman said, citing examples, mainly public SaaS companies whose stocks are down as new AI-native startups arise with better, more efficient technology. 

Ryabenky said the SaaS companies struggling to raise right now are the ones that can easily be replicated, he said.

“Generic productivity tools, project management software, basic CRM clones, and thin AI wrappers built on top of existing APIs fall into this category,” he said. “If the product is mostly an interface layer without deep integration, proprietary data, or embedded process knowledge, strong AI-native teams can rebuild it quickly. That is what makes investors cautious.”

Overa, what remains attractive about SaaS is depth and expertise, with tools embedded in critical workflows. He said companies should right now look into integrating AI deeply into their products and update their marketing to reflect that, Ryabenky continued.

“Investors are reallocating capital toward businesses that own workflows, data, and domain expertise,”  Ryabenky said. “And away from products that can be copied without much effort.” 

As persistent spam complaints have clouded Google’s Rich Communication Services (RCS) push in India, the company is turning to deeper carrier integration to bolster protections on the platform.

On Sunday, Bharti Airtel, India’s second-largest telecom operator with over 463 million subscribers, said it had partnered with Google to integrate the carrier’s network-level spam filtering into the RCS ecosystem in the country. The move is aimed at strengthening protections against unwanted messages and fraud on the platform, the companies said.

India has emerged as a particularly challenging market for spam and fraud across messaging channels, driven by the country’s vast mobile user base, rapid growth in digital payments, and aggressive enterprise marketing practices. In 2022, complaints about unsolicited ads on Google’s RCS — delivered primarily through the Google Messages app — were significant enough to prompt the company to temporarily pause business promotions on the platform in India. However, some users continue to report frustration with spam messages on Google Messages, suggesting the issue has not fully abated.

Airtel said it had been cautious about deeper alignment with Google’s RCS until traffic could be routed through its own spam controls, highlighting carrier concerns about rising fraud risks.

“We had not onboarded Google because we first wanted RCS messages to be routed through the Airtel spam filter,” an Airtel spokesperson said.

Under the partnership, Airtel’s network intelligence will be combined with Google’s RCS platform to enable real-time checks on business messaging, including sender verification, spam detection, and enforcement of users’ do-not-disturb preferences. Airtel described the move as a “global first” for integrating a telecom operator’s spam filtering directly into an over-the-top messaging platform, though the companies did not provide comparative details.

“We are committed to continuing to work with the broader ecosystem of carriers to create a consistent and trusted messaging experience for RCS users around the world,” Sameer Samat, president of Android ecosystem at Google, said in a statement. The comment signals the company may look to extend the model beyond India as it works to standardize security across the RCS ecosystem.

India represents a critical market for Google’s messaging ambitions, with more than a billion internet users and over 700 million smartphone users. The country is also home to over 853 million WhatsApp users, according to World Population Review, underlining the scale of competition in mobile messaging.

Prabhu Ram, vice president for the industry research group at CyberMedia Research, said the deeper carrier integration reflects efforts to plug longstanding weaknesses in rich messaging ecosystems that have been vulnerable to spam and fraud.

“The efficacy of this partnership should be reflected in metrics such as reductions in spam volume, user complaints, and fraud incidence, as well as improvements in engagement with legitimate messages,” Ram told TechCrunch.

Airtel has been stepping up its anti-spam efforts over the past year, saying its AI-led systems have blocked more than 71 billion spam calls and 2.9 billion spam messages, helping drive a nearly 69% drop in fraud-related financial losses on its network.

More broadly, Google has been positioning RCS as the successor to SMS, saying in May 2025 that the standard was handling more than a billion messages daily in the U.S., based on a 28-day average.

Google did not say whether similar carrier integrations are planned for other markets or provide estimates for how much the move could reduce spam and fraud.

Social community platform Discord is preparing to require users to verify their age by the second half of 2026, and users are concerned about the privacy of uploading a government ID or face scan to the network. While users can still access most features without verification, many remain uneasy giving more information to a company that suffered a breach last year that exposed the IDs of around 70,000 users. 

For some users, this is motivation enough to seek out alternative platforms that prioritize security, privacy, or simply offer a different experience. Here’s a look at the most promising Discord alternatives, from open-source and secure options to voice-first platforms built for hardcore gamers. 

Stoat

Stoat (formerly Revolt) stands out as the closest Discord alternative in both design and usability. As an open-source project, it gives users more control over their data and appeals to those who value privacy and transparency. Overall, the platform is fairly easy for Discord users to pick up, offering similar text and voice channels as well as community servers. 

However, Stoat is a relatively new platform (launched in 2021), and still faces growing pains. Recently, it experienced server capacity issues and the occasional lag during user surges. Feature support isn’t yet on par with Discord’s, and onboarding can be slow at times, especially when the platform’s popularity spikes. For those willing to trade a bit of stability for increased privacy, though, Stoat could be worth a try.

Element

For users who prioritize privacy and control above all else, Element offers a compelling alternative. Built on the decentralized Matrix protocol, Element enables users to self-host servers, maintain end-to-end encryption, and federate with other Matrix-based services. This ensures that no single company controls your data. 

While the setup and interface require a bit more technical savvy than Discord’s, Element is a good choice for users who value secure, decentralized communication.

TeamSpeak

If your primary need is high-quality, low-latency voice chat, TeamSpeak is the best alternative to Discord. While it remains popular among competitive gamers for its superior audio and private server hosting, its text chat and media sharing are quite basic. It’s also missing built-in video calls as well as emojis and gifs. So if you don’t mind not having as many features, it’s great for voice-centric groups that don’t need all the bells and whistles.

Similar to Stoat, TeamSpeak has experienced a surge in new users, prompting the platform to expand its hosting capacity. In February, TeamSpeak introduced two new regions for community creation: “Frankfurt 3” and “Toronto 1.”

Mumble

Mumble is a free, open-source voice chat application. Like TeamSpeak, it provides high-quality, low-latency audio and allows users to host and customize their own servers. However, its interface is outdated and lacks some of the features found in Discord, making it more ideal for hardcore gamers focused on voice chat rather than community building through video calls, media sharing, or screen sharing.

Discourse

Those who prefer long-form, organized discussions over rapid-fire chat may find Discourse more appealing. As an open-source forum platform, Discourse supports threaded discussions, making it ideal for educational groups, professional teams, and communities that value in-depth conversation. However, users looking for instant messaging, voice, and casual group chats may find it less familiar than Discord.

Slack, Microsoft Teams, Signal, or WhatsApp

Other notable mentions include Slack and Microsoft Teams, which serve well for professional and productivity-focused communication. Signal is also a top choice for those who want end-to-end encryption and privacy. Meanwhile, WhatsApp also offers free messaging and group voice calls, though it’s not designed for gaming or large communities.

What to know about age verification on Discord 

Discord recently announced that it will soon implement age verification measures aimed at creating a safer environment, particularly for its younger users. This initiative is designed to ensure users meet the necessary age requirements to access certain features and communities on the platform. Users may be required to verify their age through various methods, which could involve submitting an ID, completing a facial age estimation, or using a credit card. 

By default, all users will experience a “teen-appropriate” setting, and only those verified as adults will have the ability to modify certain settings or access age-restricted content. Adults will be required to verify their status to unblur sensitive content and to access channels and servers designated for an older audience. 

After a recent backlash, Discord postponed the official launch to the latter half of 2026, adding that 90% of users will not require age verification and can continue using the platform without changes, as many users do not engage with age-restricted content. The platform initially planned to roll out age verification in March.