[jjfoooo4]

Both companies have the same issue: the unit economics are bad, and there’s no moat.

I’ve been primarily on Claude for the last 6 months or so, but have been hitting rate limits. I switched work to Codex seamlessly, just like I could switch to any other provider seamlessly

[oofbey]

The unit economics at this point are about utilization. Their cost is well below what they’re charging, but only when there is enough traffic to keep the GPUs busy. So the game is about increasing demand to level the load.

GPT has negligible moat because they gave up on all their integrations. Claude code is starting to develop one as people start to build things that require Claude Code specifically, not just any LLM.

[jjfoooo4]

> Claude code is starting to develop one as people start to build things that require Claude Code specifically, not just any LLM.

I hate to be a "source?" guy, but I'm curious if you have any examples of this. Skills and MCP are really the only extensions on CC itself I'm aware of, and these are both supported in Codex.

Things like Dispatch / remote sessions is something CC has that Codex does not, but these features are quite easy to replicate (and I expect Codex to do so in short order).

[oofbey]

I agree that’s a great question which I don’t really know the answer to. These tools have been moving in lock step for some time now. One will innovate and within 2-3 weeks the others have that feature. Where I sit the mind share all seems to be going to Claude though. The moat develops when people build something that only works on one - even if the others have the same features it doesn’t matter unless they’re literally binary compatible. Skills are just prompts at the end of the day with nothing more specialized than a file naming convention.

Having written several orchestrators I’ll say that the code to invoke the tool is pretty equivalent but it’s the details that matter. Exact CLI flags and json fields.