Is this your AI moat? Or, Apple's next keynote slide?

The same AI feature is worth millions at Microsoft - but billions at Apple.

Why? The best AI projects I’ve seen don’t just impress

They change how customers buy, use, or pay.

Headline AI wins tempt every boardroom
But pouring resources into vanity projects rarely shifts adoption.

Or revenue.

Microsoft just launched Copilot on Samsung’s latest TVs.
The voice assistant helps pick shows, and searches the web for what’s on screen.

Clever.

But TV’s are a once in a decade purchase.

Will anyone spend £2,000 for a talking TV guide?

Apple could launch the same feature next week:
At £149 for an Apple TV, that’s a far lower price barrier.

Even if Copilot on a TV excites buyers, Microsoft can’t turn that into long-term advantage.

What’s a minor upgrade for Microsoft and Samsung is a flywheel for Apple.

With TV+, Apple’s streaming service, Siri can recommend exclusive shows,
And pull users deeper into Apple’s subscriptions.

Features only matter if they deepen your ecosystem. Copilot doesn’t.

On phones, Samsung is tied to Google, not Microsoft.

And without their own streaming services, there’s no stickiness to keep customers in.

Compounding AI plays make ecosystems harder to leave, easier to spend in, and more valuable with every use.

Every strategy session I’ve been in has surfaced the same pattern:

Most AI projects are sugar hits - impressive, short-lived, forgettable;

A few are compounders - defensible, habit-forming, revenue-shaping.

Those few are the ones that matter.

So look at your roadmap again:
Which of your AI projects are optics… and which are engines of compounding growth?