CRM
Salesforce, Inc.
stock NYSE

Gotta be honest man, after my NOW and CRM and ZS and RBRK calls hit it big later this year, I will consider doing the same strategy. Just sitting on my cash and just waiting to strike it big when the memes reach level 100 and everything is red.

You’re clearly too wrapped up in your convictions to make any coherent argument.
“Software that’s good enough to route CRM logic should also be good enough to fly a plane” is one the dumbest points I think I’ve ever read on this site.

"Deterministic systems fail constantly also. You’re comparing AI’s imperfection to an idealised version of deterministic software that doesn’t actually exist in production."
But you can make it better with bug fixing. Probabilistic never will be.
"Conflating AI shouldn’t weld cars with AI shouldn’t guess where to route a CRM record is just stupid."
Why is it? If your software is so good at CRM routing, why can't it be used to make cars, run drug trials, do the avionics in aircraft? Or are you saying it's not actually very good? At which point, is it better than doing CRM with code?
"No I haven’t seen Salesforce’s codebase. Presumably neither have you."
Yes, but I'm not the one making claims about how easy it would be to fix it.
"Having worked at companies at Salesforce scale I can assure you there is debt, deprecated dependencies, and business logic nobody fully understands anymore, regardless of how good their API layer is."
You can assure me, but you've never worked there.
"Again, I am not making a case against Salesforce. I’m making a case against the dismissiveness of AIs disruption of SaaS companies. America has a long history of incumbents who failed to adapt when the landscape changed. Blockbuster, Nokia, Kodak, BlackBerry, Sears etc. The software landscape changed. Brushing it off as nonsense is short-sighted."
Completely different. A digital camera, Amazon, Netflix are still deterministic services. You didn't press a button on an iPhone and get random behaviour you weren't expecting.
"But I guess who am I to argue with the -22% YTD results of your picks"
Yet another bit of your telepathy at work there. Beyond knowing the code base at Salesforce, you also know when I bought the stock. Do you talk to the dead and bend spoons as well?

Deterministic systems fail constantly also. You’re comparing AI’s imperfection to an idealised version of deterministic software that doesn’t actually exist in production.
It’s also not a crude algorithm. It’s high-dimensional pattern matching and it can map a described outcome to an action without someone hand-coding every rule and mapping in advance
Conflating AI shouldn’t weld cars with AI shouldn’t guess where to route a CRM record is just a stupid.
No I haven’t seen Salesforce’s codebase. Presumably neither have you. Having worked at companies at Salesforce scale I can assure you there is debt, deprecated dependencies, and business logic nobody fully understands anymore, regardless of how good their API layer is.
As for trust, it’s the same adoption curve every automation technology has gone through, eventually automaton gets there. There are loads of guardrails, fiction calling, and context injection paths you can add to narrow the scope of error. And yes, heavily regulated companies like banks will be much slower on the curve. The majority of Salesforce costumers aren’t banks.
Again, I am not making a case against Salesforce. I’m making a case against the dismissive of AIs disruption of SaaS companies. America has a long history of incumbents who failed to adapt when the landscape changed. Blockbuster, Nokia, Kodak, BlackBerry, Sears etc. The software landscape changed. Brushing it off as nonsense is short-sighted. But I guess who am I to argue with the -22% YTD results of your picks.
Google and Microsoft are the only AI adjacent companies I have. Maybe Analog Devices and intuitive Surgical could be argued for as well.

Fraction of cost and budget? I don't know quite what percentage you are thinking there. It improves coding performance. NewCRM can do their coding a bit quicker. But so can Salesforce.
"No I don’t work in AI but I know many non programmers that now use AI to create apps and software that they sell."
And that's a whole different thing to Salesforce because of scale and importance.
Scale: is it used by 5 people or 150,000 people. If it's 150,000 people, it's worth spending money to make it solid. The cost per person is tiny.
Importance: if the software is wrong, what is the negative outcome? Does a plane fall out of the sky, can someone not get money out of the bank, does a sales call not happen or do they not get the fun fact of the day?
I've vibe coded a wine scanner. Point it at a label and it tells you about the wine and where to buy it. Now and again, the results are crap. Outcome? Minor annoyance to the user.
There's a world of difference between my wine scanner being crap, and a CRM being crap. That might mean data isn't saved or updated properly, it might mean you fail to contact someone about something.
The thing with all the companies I've bought into is that there's scale and/or importance. How many of your friends are working on something as serious as systems to submit regulatory documents for the medical industry like Veeva do? Or to handle scheduling of field service like ServiceNow?

"Let's take Salesforce as that is the one i know more about, if a small business wants to use their product then they will be paying $25-100 per user per month, that quickly scales to thousands and tens of thousands. Yes maybe with the current abilities of AI it isn't worth trying to create an alternative but that is only going to lean more and more in favour of AI. Lets imagine that in 5 years time you can describe your business to AI and it can create a CRM product tailored specifically to your business. Yes this still won't be possible for large companies that have decades of customer data within Salesforce but it's a process that can slowly transition to all new businesses and as small businesses grow the AI CRM could adapt with them."
You've made a massive leap in there, that in 5 years, probabilistic AI will deliver that level of understanding of your demands.
I am going to guess here that you don't work in AI, don't know the fundamentals of how LLMs work, or the principles like Bayesian inference. To get to what you're saying in 5 years requires completely overhauling the current state of AI. Requires a whole fundamentally new technology.
This is the sell of AI. "Look at how great self-driving is now at 99%. Coast-to-coast is just around the corner". The problem is that probabiility might get you to 99%. But it's not reasoning, so the human has to step in to deal with it. It's why Robotaxis have a load of humans watching the cars who can intervene.
It's really important when analysing this stuff to understand the mechanics of what is being done, and why all sorts of vague promises probably won't happen any time soon.

The same improvement to productivity also applies to Salesforce. If you can code 20% quicker because of AI, so can their people.
And you're missing the scale thing. Salesforce have 150,000 corporate customers. Your little team making a CRM has how many? So, how much does it cost for you to deliver a feature per customer compared to Salesforce?
It's why small software teams mostly work in niches, new businesses. It's madness to go head to head with giants because you can't do it as cheaply.
You also face the problems of things like familiarity, integration etc. There's a whole marketplace for Shopify. Developers who know the API and have built controls. There are people you can hire to integrate Shopify into your system. If you need staff to deal with setting up products, there are people with that experience. There are videos about using it. I helped a business set up Shopify and built a feed of orders into the main CRM. £50 a month and a few days work to build the feed. Are you going to beat that with vibe coding a whole e-commerce system?

I don't have to explain anything, there are thousands of companies I'm not comfortable investing in, you are the one putting money into it and if your entire thesis is "AI nonsense" then you aren't gonna outperform the market but I'll humour you.
Let's take Salesforce as that is the one i know more about, if a small business wants to use their product then they will be paying $25-100 per user per month, that quickly scales to thousands and tens of thousands. Yes maybe with the current abilities of AI it isn't worth trying to create an alternative but that is only going to lean more and more in favour of AI. Lets imagine that in 5 years time you can describe your business to AI and it can create a CRM product tailored specifically to your business. Yes this still won't be possible for large companies that have decades of customer data within Salesforce but it's a process that can slowly transition to all new businesses and as small businesses grow the AI CRM could adapt with them.
Do you really see a world in which Salesforce won't lose that low end part of the market which will slowly leak into the upper end of the market?

adbe i am not sure since ai image generation. I like NOW CRM UBER. IDK the other companies much. BABA im waiting for a pullback to buy a bit only since its chinese.

This market is so trash. SaaSpocalypse  happens and $PLTR gets grouped into it and drags down $CRM, $SNOW, and $NOW. Oh, but as soon as PLTR starts doing well all the sudden it’s not considered a SaaS player. What a joke.

These are what I own, and my thesis. Glad to hear any thoughts.
1. Adobe. Part of the SaaS reverse. I think the whole AI thing hammered it. Bought way too early but holding at this point.
2. Alibaba. Bought just a little on gut. Mostly, I got this because I like AliExpress. Not the AI side. But like it as a long-term company
3. Autodesk. Part of the SaaS reverse. No-one is going to vibe code CAD software
4. B&M. British discount retailer. Actually, a stupid investment based on thinking the UK would go into recession and buy more cheap goods. But I've been lucky, the new CEO is turning it around.
5. BYD. Just really good cars. Long term investment. Know someone who got one instead of a Mercedes and won't go back. Took me for a ride and I get it. New European factories will open up tariff-free access to that market.
6. Energean. Israeli gas platform. Always takes a hammering if there's trouble in the Middle East. So, buy it, wait for everything to blow over and sell. In the meantime, pays a really nice dividend.
7. ME Group. They were best known for photo booths, but that is in decline. Shifting to automated laundrettes. I think there's a big future in more automated services and at rock bottom price and P/E.
8. Relx. Information services. Battered by the AI nonsense.
9. Salesforce. Also, AI nonsense.
10. ServiceNow. As above
11. Uber. Apart from the fact that I love Uber as a customer and use them for taxis, trains, coach bookings, I don't think AVs are going to be as huge as everyone thinks, and that Uber are already working towards their own fleet. Uber is your gateway, your store. You want a cab, maybe someone else does it but you book through Uber.
12. Veeva Systems. They do CRM software for the medical industry. So, more specialised. Battered by AI nonsense.
13. WH Smith. British airport retailer. Large moat because if you want a drink at an airport you don't have much other choice. Hit badly by oil problems, which I think is exaggerated. At this point I think this might be the best bargain as the oil troubles are priced in.

[CRM](https://www.onvista.de/aktien/SALESFORCE-INC-Aktie-US79466L3024) - Salesforce 📃@158,20€(-2,20% 😡)

Bitte sagt euren Chefs das nur $CRM euch actionable business insights generieren kann. (Das ich während der Saas-pocalypse die Tunke gekauft habe hat nichts damit zu tun btw.)

YOLO on CRM

Gotta be honest man, after my NOW and CRM and ZS and RBRK calls hit it big later this year, I will consider doing the same strategy. Just sitting on my cash and just waiting to strike it big when the memes reach level 100 and everything is red.

You’re clearly too wrapped up in your convictions to make any coherent argument.
“Software that’s good enough to route CRM logic should also be good enough to fly a plane” is one the dumbest points I think I’ve ever read on this site.

"Deterministic systems fail constantly also. You’re comparing AI’s imperfection to an idealised version of deterministic software that doesn’t actually exist in production."
But you can make it better with bug fixing. Probabilistic never will be.
"Conflating AI shouldn’t weld cars with AI shouldn’t guess where to route a CRM record is just stupid."
Why is it? If your software is so good at CRM routing, why can't it be used to make cars, run drug trials, do the avionics in aircraft? Or are you saying it's not actually very good? At which point, is it better than doing CRM with code?
"No I haven’t seen Salesforce’s codebase. Presumably neither have you."
Yes, but I'm not the one making claims about how easy it would be to fix it.
"Having worked at companies at Salesforce scale I can assure you there is debt, deprecated dependencies, and business logic nobody fully understands anymore, regardless of how good their API layer is."
You can assure me, but you've never worked there.
"Again, I am not making a case against Salesforce. I’m making a case against the dismissiveness of AIs disruption of SaaS companies. America has a long history of incumbents who failed to adapt when the landscape changed. Blockbuster, Nokia, Kodak, BlackBerry, Sears etc. The software landscape changed. Brushing it off as nonsense is short-sighted."
Completely different. A digital camera, Amazon, Netflix are still deterministic services. You didn't press a button on an iPhone and get random behaviour you weren't expecting.
"But I guess who am I to argue with the -22% YTD results of your picks"
Yet another bit of your telepathy at work there. Beyond knowing the code base at Salesforce, you also know when I bought the stock. Do you talk to the dead and bend spoons as well?

Deterministic systems fail constantly also. You’re comparing AI’s imperfection to an idealised version of deterministic software that doesn’t actually exist in production.
It’s also not a crude algorithm. It’s high-dimensional pattern matching and it can map a described outcome to an action without someone hand-coding every rule and mapping in advance
Conflating AI shouldn’t weld cars with AI shouldn’t guess where to route a CRM record is just a stupid.
No I haven’t seen Salesforce’s codebase. Presumably neither have you. Having worked at companies at Salesforce scale I can assure you there is debt, deprecated dependencies, and business logic nobody fully understands anymore, regardless of how good their API layer is.
As for trust, it’s the same adoption curve every automation technology has gone through, eventually automaton gets there. There are loads of guardrails, fiction calling, and context injection paths you can add to narrow the scope of error. And yes, heavily regulated companies like banks will be much slower on the curve. The majority of Salesforce costumers aren’t banks.
Again, I am not making a case against Salesforce. I’m making a case against the dismissive of AIs disruption of SaaS companies. America has a long history of incumbents who failed to adapt when the landscape changed. Blockbuster, Nokia, Kodak, BlackBerry, Sears etc. The software landscape changed. Brushing it off as nonsense is short-sighted. But I guess who am I to argue with the -22% YTD results of your picks.
Google and Microsoft are the only AI adjacent companies I have. Maybe Analog Devices and intuitive Surgical could be argued for as well.

Fraction of cost and budget? I don't know quite what percentage you are thinking there. It improves coding performance. NewCRM can do their coding a bit quicker. But so can Salesforce.
"No I don’t work in AI but I know many non programmers that now use AI to create apps and software that they sell."
And that's a whole different thing to Salesforce because of scale and importance.
Scale: is it used by 5 people or 150,000 people. If it's 150,000 people, it's worth spending money to make it solid. The cost per person is tiny.
Importance: if the software is wrong, what is the negative outcome? Does a plane fall out of the sky, can someone not get money out of the bank, does a sales call not happen or do they not get the fun fact of the day?
I've vibe coded a wine scanner. Point it at a label and it tells you about the wine and where to buy it. Now and again, the results are crap. Outcome? Minor annoyance to the user.
There's a world of difference between my wine scanner being crap, and a CRM being crap. That might mean data isn't saved or updated properly, it might mean you fail to contact someone about something.
The thing with all the companies I've bought into is that there's scale and/or importance. How many of your friends are working on something as serious as systems to submit regulatory documents for the medical industry like Veeva do? Or to handle scheduling of field service like ServiceNow?

"Let's take Salesforce as that is the one i know more about, if a small business wants to use their product then they will be paying $25-100 per user per month, that quickly scales to thousands and tens of thousands. Yes maybe with the current abilities of AI it isn't worth trying to create an alternative but that is only going to lean more and more in favour of AI. Lets imagine that in 5 years time you can describe your business to AI and it can create a CRM product tailored specifically to your business. Yes this still won't be possible for large companies that have decades of customer data within Salesforce but it's a process that can slowly transition to all new businesses and as small businesses grow the AI CRM could adapt with them."
You've made a massive leap in there, that in 5 years, probabilistic AI will deliver that level of understanding of your demands.
I am going to guess here that you don't work in AI, don't know the fundamentals of how LLMs work, or the principles like Bayesian inference. To get to what you're saying in 5 years requires completely overhauling the current state of AI. Requires a whole fundamentally new technology.
This is the sell of AI. "Look at how great self-driving is now at 99%. Coast-to-coast is just around the corner". The problem is that probabiility might get you to 99%. But it's not reasoning, so the human has to step in to deal with it. It's why Robotaxis have a load of humans watching the cars who can intervene.
It's really important when analysing this stuff to understand the mechanics of what is being done, and why all sorts of vague promises probably won't happen any time soon.