Only 40%? Would have thought it would be much higher. Don't more projects generally fail then that without being in a bubble?

Low ball, rookie numbers!
I say we go for 90%, including the added costs of re-hiring previous staff or training new ones.

About time we saw a more balances take.

Especially from Gartner of all places. Maybe this will finally start tempering the hype in the executives.

Seems like every time the hype is about to die, there's a big announcement about a model breakthrough. The breakthrough usually isn't as revolutionary as it first appears, but it's enough to keep funding going.

I suspect they didn’t want to make it sound alarmist or something, but yes the real percentage is likely going to be higher, including a good chunk of “technically finished but remaining unused and forever idle on some box until it’s quietly shut down 5-10 years later.”

Bubble grows big, bubble goes pop.

You can't explain that!

60% success rate sounds like a very optimistic take.
Investing in a AI startup with 60% chance of success? That's a VC's wet dream!

40% of what? Just random number of projects these webinar attendees thought of??

Not a 60% success rate, but a 60% rate of throwing good money after bad.

Sounds like a number pulled out the butt. It will be closer to all of them going by GitHub projects spun up on the timeline, never to be completed.

Then they'll go: "Source: my presentation from last year where I made up that number"

If that money funnels to unemployed engineers to set it up... I'm all for it.

Take the money, do the work, jump ship.

Investors are well aware this is a bubble. But they can't risk losing the bet when the stakes are the next Google, or even the next internet.

And no matter what, AI is here to stay and someone is coming out on top.

The numbers are for failures in the next two years. Plenty of projects will coast that long on investment dollars.