AI Styling Studio — Infinite avatar looks from just 1 photo.Try it now.

BestAITools

Submit your Tool

8000+ AI tools already listed
8K+Tools
100K+/moViews
25K+/moVisitors

AI NewsReplit’s Amjad Masad on the Cursor deal, fighting Apple, and why he’d rather not sell

Replit’s Amjad Masad on the Cursor deal, fighting Apple, and why he’d rather not sell

6:23 AM IST · May 2, 2026

Replit’s Amjad Masad on the Cursor deal, fighting Apple, and why he’d rather not sell

Amjad Masad has been building Replit for a decade, but the last 18 months have been something else entirely. The AI coding assistant company went from $2.8 million in revenue in all of 2024 to tracking toward what Masad describes as a billion-dollar annual run rate. At TechCrunch’s sold-outStrictlyVC eventin San Francisco on Thursday night, we covered a lot of ground in a short time, beginning with the question everyone in the industry is asking right now: in a world where rival Cursor is reportedly in talks to be acquired by SpaceX for$60 billion, is Replit also bound to sell? We also got into Replit’s net revenue retention — a measure of how much existing customers expand their spending — which Masad says is reaching as high as 300%, his willingness to take Apple to court over what he called outright lies in its App Store battle with Replit, and the possibility of the company beginning to invest in its own customers. On the question of independence, Masad was unambiguous. Unlike Cursor, which he said has been operating at negative 23% gross margins, he argued Replit has the economics to make that path viable — even if he stopped short of ruling out a sale entirely. The following has been edited for length and clarity: TC: Cursor’s reported SpaceX deal was the talk of the industry last week. What did you make of it? AM: It’s kind of hard being an independent, smaller AI company that’s building on foundation models, especially if you’re burning a ton of cash. Part of the reporting suggested Cursor has negative 23% margins, and if you’re also wanting to invest in training models, that makes it incredibly hard to stay independent. For us at Replit, partly because we target a different customer set, we’ve been able to run the business more rationally. We’ve been gross margin positive for over a year. We’re slightly more expensive, but we provide a lot more. Our audience tends to be mostly non-technical users who previously haven’t been able to create any software. We provide an end-to-end platform — from the prompt all the way to a deployed application that can scale. We handle security, databases, database migration. And we’ve been doing this long enough that we’ve built a lot of those primitives into the platform. Is Replit for sale? I would assume you are talking with potential acquirers all the time; it’s your fiduciary responsibility. Yeah. We have amazing partners, and they sometimes bring up these topics. But we’re going to try to stay independent. I would love for us to remain an independent company. We’ve been around for 10 years, before it was even accepted that you could make apps just from ideas. We were talking about creating a billion software creators back in 2018 at YC, and people sometimes actually laughed at that dream. Now that dream is possible, and we kicked off this revolution with our agentic coding experience in September 2024. It just feels like we can take it much further. You work closely with Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI. If you had to rank them — who’s doing it best? Anthropic is still undefeated on the core agentic loop. They have the best tool calling; the agent can stay coherent much longer. GPT-5 is catching up quickly. Google’s Flash family of models is just amazing on price-performance. If you want something fast and cheap, they’re actually beating open source right now. We use all three, and honestly I wouldn’t discount the newer labs either. Reflection AI is coming out with open-source models we’re hearing great things about. And the Chinese models are impressive — Kimi is as good as an Anthropic-generation model from January, so it’s only about three months behind. When you’re in a bake-off for an enterprise deal, what wins it for you? Most of our sales are inbound or organic — very product-led. We’ve acquired customers like Zillow and Meta purely through people adopting the product and then raising their hand to buy an enterprise plan. When it does go top-down and there’s a formal bake-off, we usually win on product. But even in cases where we might be missing a feature, once it hits the C-suite and the IT group, Replit wins on security. A lot of vibe-coding tools will generate a website and connect it to an external database — great products, but it makes security much harder, because the database is open to the public and you need to configure row-level security, which is especially difficult for non-technical builders. Replit being full stack, with the database built into the project and not open to the public — that makes the app inherently more secure. We also spent 10 years battling crypto scammers and hackers, so our cybersecurity function is as good as a dedicated cybersecurity startup. Every time you deploy an app on Replit, we create an entirely new isolated project on Google Cloud. We inherit Google’s security model. Can we talk about churn? How long do you hold onto customers if the best prototypes eventually get rebuilt into a company’s existing stack? Churn is very, very low, and net retention is incredibly high — 300% in some cases. What we actually hear from customers is that when engineers get nervous and try to rebuild an app into their own stack, they often make it worse. Once enterprises get comfortable with the full Replit stack — especially when we set up a single-tenant environment for them — they keep the apps on Replit. Bain & Company, for example, replaced Tableau and Power BI with Replit and Databricks. There’s a growing concern about AI bloat — non-technical users generate far more code and burn through far more tokens. That’s good for you [given your usage-based fees]. What about your customers? We don’t have a lot of regrettable spend. Enterprises are very ROI conscious, and they tell us about the returns they’re getting. For the most part they feel the investment is totally worth it — often one, two, three orders of magnitude. If they spend $100,000 a month with Replit, they’re usually generating $2 million, $3 million, $10 million in some kind of return. Let’s talk about Apple. Another rival, Lovable, just got anapp-building appapproved by the App Store this week. Replit has been in App Store purgatory, with Apple blocking your updates for months. How much does that hurt you? It’s not life or death — we could lose the app and it wouldn’t do anything meaningful to our business. But it’s an app people genuinely love. We’ve been on the App Store for four years. Kids in underprivileged communities learn to code on Replit on their Android devices. Executives use it in meetings. The reason Replit got blocked when others weren’t, we believe, is that Replit makes iOS apps. When we launched that capability in December, there were charts going around showing how many apps were getting into the App Store through us. We think Apple feels threatened by that. Apple’s stated reason is that you’re downloading new code to the device [after the approval process], which violates their guidelines. That’s a lie. And we can prove it in court if we have to. Is that going to happen? I hope not. I’m a fan of Apple, and I’d love to collaborate and build something great together. We’re happy to send customers to Xcode [Apple’s own development environment]. But you can’t run a marketplace that a billion people have access to and make decisions that are discriminatory or based on whims. Just wondering if, like Nvidia, OpenAI and others, you’re thinking about investing in your own customers in exchange for equity. We’ve thought a lot about it, and it is a consideration. I’ve personally invested in a few startups that started on Replit before they made any money. Some of them, like Magic School — a teacher decided to take his time during COVID to learn a little bit of vibe coding and built an AI app for other teachers. He found this problem that in America, we burn out a lot of teachers. He wanted to use AI to reduce the workload. He did that, and he made $20 million in the first year. Other companies that started on Replit, I think, are valued at half a billion dollars. The entrepreneurship happening on Replit right now is genuinely exciting. We integrated with Stripe a few months ago, and the transactions flowing through Replit are growing triple digits month over month. Pretty soon, our customers will be making more revenue than we are. You can watch our full conversation with Masad below:

read more

Latest AI News

View All News →
India's Compliance Maze: How TeamLease RegTech Is Using AI to Tame a 13,000-Change Beast

India's Compliance Maze: How TeamLease RegTech Is Using AI to Tame a 13,000-Change Beast

Enterprises in India face up to 11,000 compliance instances annually from over 3.2 million regulatory websites. TeamLease RegTech is deploying AI to shift compliance from reactive record-keeping to predictive, intelligence-driven risk management for businesses nationwide.

22 minutes ago

View

Meta Strikes Fresh Data Centre Agreements With Crusoe: Report

Meta Strikes Fresh Data Centre Agreements With Crusoe: Report

The latest deal reflects Meta’s ongoing efforts to expand its AI infrastructure as demand for large-scale computing resources continues to grow.

22 minutes ago

View

Source: Elastic agrees to buy CRV-backed DeductiveAI for up to $85M

Source: Elastic agrees to buy CRV-backed DeductiveAI for up to $85M

DeductiveAI, a startup that uses AI to catch and resolve bugs in software, has agreed to be sold to enterprise software company Elastic for up to $85 million, according to a person with knowledge of the deal. Deductive, which was founded in 2023, came out stealth last November when it announced a$7.5 million seedround led by CRV with participation from Databricks Ventures, Thomvest Ventures, and PrimeSet.  The investment valued the startup at $33 million, according to PitchBook. Elastic and Deductive did not respond to multiple requests for comment. TechCrunch will update this article if either company responds. The sale marks a speedy exit for Deductive, which is operating in a fast-growing sector known as AI site reliability engineering (AI SRE). Building AI-powered SRE tools has become an important area, driven by the massive influx of AI-written code. Replacing manual debugging with AI enables human SREs to shift focus from constantly fixing outages and other problems, to spending more time on helping with product development. The acquisition reflects a broader trend in which established tech incumbents are looking to buy AI-native startups to integrate agentic technologies into their existing product suites, the source told TechCrunch. Elastic, which went public in 2018, is best known for Elasticsearch, the search and analytics engine that helps organizations store, search, analyze, and monitor large amounts of data in near real time. The company’s observability software — essentially tools that let engineers monitor software systems and detect security threats — could benefit from Deductive’s tech. According to the source, integrating Deductive’s AI technology into Elastic will enhance its observability platform by giving customers tools to automatically monitor performance and resolve system failures in real-time. Deductive was co-founded by Rakesh Kothari, who was previously VP of engineering at Lightspeed-backed business analytics startup ThoughtSpot, and Sameer Agarwal, who formerly worked at Apache Software Foundation and Meta. Agrawal was one of the founding engineers at Databricks. While Deductive reached roughly $1 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR,) according to the source, the startup’s growth lagged behind Resolve AI, one of the sectors’ perceived early winners. The two-year-old Resolve was co-founded by former Splunk executive Spiros Xanthos and Mayank Agarwal. Greylock and Lightspeed-backed startup was last valued at$1.5 billionwhen it raised a $40 million Series A extension in April.

4 hours ago

View

Almost half of U.S. singles feel negatively about AI in dating, Match says

Almost half of U.S. singles feel negatively about AI in dating, Match says

Dating app giant Match Group — which owns apps like Tinder, Hinge, and OkCupid — conducted astudyto determine how U.S. singles really feel about the relationship between AI and dating. Turns out, people don’t want AI messing with every aspect of human life. Across the industry, dating apps are experimenting with AI. Bumble introduced adating assistant named Bee, and Tinder isspendingso much on AI tools that it’s slowed its hiring process. Meanwhile, Hinge’s CEOstepped downlast year to launch a more AI-focused dating app altogether. But according to Match’s survey of 1,000 people aged 18 to 39, 47% of singles have a negative view of AI’s use in romantic contexts. This perspective varies depending on what the AI is being used for. About 40% of singles say they would refuse to date someone who uses an AI companion app, and that figure rises to 51% among women ages 18 to 24. However, only 12% of 18- to 24-year-olds said that they had used a companion app over the last three months, and only about a third of those users said they were seeking genuine connections with those chatbots. While Match says that people harbor a “near-universal” disapproval of actually dating an AI, like in the movie “Her,” that doesn’t mean that respondents are wholly opposed to AI features within apps. Some 64% of respondents said they could see how AI might help them in their dating journey. If we’re being pedantic,technically, every major dating app has already used some form of matching algorithm since before we knew what a GPT was. This survey refers to the new crop of AI features that basically every app is introducing, which help users punch up their profiles, choose photos, and keep conversations flowing. What dating app developers should take away from this survey is that people are not entirely closed off to AI; they just don’t want to be in a relationship with a robot, nor do they want to feel as though their dating experiences are overly inundated with technology that feels inauthentic. “Ask singles what they want from AI in dating, and the answer is pretty consistent: help with the hard parts, but hands off for the human parts,” Match wrote in a blog post. “Yes, they’ll use it to help them punch up a profile or for help figuring out what to say when a conversation goes quiet, but the actual connection is still theirs to create.” Hopefully, this message reaches dating entrepreneurs like Bumble founder Whitney Wolfe Herd, who suggested that dating app users could havepersonal bots that date other users’ bots. It’s pretty normal nowadays to say you met your partner online, but “his bot asked my bot out, and our bots hit it off” will never be a socially acceptable meet-cute.

8 hours ago

View