I've been through a few cycles where startups had to focus on being default alive. We are now in one of those. But this time it's 95% of startups. The top 5% have endless money.

I don't think I've seen a topic as wildly, incapacitatingly, intellectually deranging as Agentic Commerce. Note that there are no arguments here; it is taken for granted that a) "people" (who?) will want agents to buy "stuff" (what stuff?) for them and b) "they" (who?) won't want to use "some Amazon-supplied agent to do it" (why not? And how do we interpret Amazon's in incremental annualized sales in 2025 from Rufus / Alexa for Shopping then?). This is not disciplined, logical analysis. This is faith; religious fervor. That some new technological capability becomes the dominant consumer form factor is asserted as inevitable without support. But we know what retail platforms' incentives are: to directly manage consumer relationships so as to induce broader monetization, advertising revenue, and deeper integration (see: Amazon and Walmart commentary on the value of advertising to their businesses, Amazon's deterministic identity spine reaching 90% of US households, Walmart's acquisition of Vizio and vibe, etc.). If all of this is stripped away: what actual opportunity exists to compete with Amazon? In other words, if the consumer relationship is competed away, what's the value of merely operating the agent <-> retailer plumbing? Sounds like a commodity with substantial operating costs if the retail platform is still expected to manage fulfillment and logistics, customer service / returns, etc. Or will the agent do this?

Doesn't this just mean the meeting should never have existed?