Investor Brianne Kimmel: Most Sticky Products Are Just Project-Based Revenue
Investor Brianne Kimmel pointed out that tools aimed at product manager teams (EPD, i.e., Engineering, Product, Design) are emerging in large numbers recently, but many companies overemphasize "sticky products," while the actual revenue structure is closer to "project-based, easily switchable services." Such products lack long-term binding and high switching costs in the eyes of customers, making it difficult to form genuine long-term revenue.
Observations in the English market and SaaS industry research indicate that many enterprise-level tools are being procured in a "functional module" rather than a "platform" manner, with customers preferring to pay based on project cycles rather than long-term subscriptions. This aligns with recent reflections on the narrative of "product-led growth": stickiness cannot rely solely on user experience; it must match customer budget structures and decision cycles.
Within the EPD system, the procurement of such tools is often driven by short-term project goals, and once the project ends, the willingness to renew significantly declines. This makes the "sticky product" label more of a sales pitch than a reflection of real financial structure.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
This phenomenon's fundamental contradiction lies in the mismatch between product-level and business-level rhythms. Developers within EPD teams build long-term experience loops, while the enterprise procurement level sees discrete projects and short-term goals. The result is that the tools may have excellent user experiences but cannot be embedded into the core business processes of customers, thus being downgraded to "temporary services" rather than "long-term capital expenditures."
In this regard, revenue structures are redefining the "moat." If revenue is essentially project-based and easily switchable, then pricing power, renewal rates, and customer concentration will all be weakened. Products with true bargaining power must be those that can change customer organizational processes, budget structures, and power relationships, rather than just being "small tools" that make individual teams work more smoothly.
For SaaS companies and investors, this means that the "stickiness test" should shift from "user retention rate" to "enterprise budget stickiness." Whether a product is included in the annual budget, whether it is regarded as a key supplier, and whether it is deeply integrated with HR, IT, and financial processes—these indicators reflect long-term value more than interface stickiness. In an environment with an increasing number of AI-native tools, those who can upgrade "easy-to-use tools" to "infrastructure" will be the ones who can truly convert project revenue into platform revenue.