Ep 777: No, Anthropic isn’t leading In Enterprise AI Adoption. Separating AI Facts from Fiction and how Companies Should Choose Providers

This is the Everyday AI Show, the everyday podcast where we simplify AI and bring its power to your fingertips. Listen daily for practical advice to boost your career, business, and everyday life.

Meet Firefly AI Assistant, now live in Adobe Firefly, the all-in-one creative AI studio. Just describe what you want to create and the assistant handles the rest, orchestrating multi-step workflows across Photoshop, Premiere, Express, and more in one conversational interface. You direct the outcome, the assistant accelerates execution.

You're going to be reading a lot of headlines today and probably later this week about how Anthropic is now leading the AI enterprise battle over OpenAI, and they're all gonna sound super definitive and matter of fact, so it's got to be legit, right? Because big name publications ran with this story, like Business Insider and TechCrunch, Axios, and even the Wall Street Journal. But should you believe all these headlines, especially when they were all based on the same single study that is misleading at best and failed at middle school math Despite positioning itself as a reputable data source. So I don't think the most important topic here is if Anthropic or OpenAI is winning the enterprise. I mean, we'll find that out soon enough as both companies prepare to go public later this year and have to release a lot of their financials. What's important to dissect today is the decisions that your company has to make when it comes to enterprise AI products to use and the data that you use to make those decisions. Based upon. Because as we'll talk about today, some of the biggest and stickiest data points that companies are making these decisions on are pretty bad, and they may not all be true. And let me just get this out of the way: I'm a former journalist, and I'm a fan of facts and data, and I'm approaching this look at the Ramp study as understanding how the combination of pre-IPO marketing and also lazy journalism can lead your company astray if you're not careful. and I'm not saying that Anthropic's Claude is bad or worse than OpenAI. I'm focusing on facts, misconceptions, and truth that you need to make the right decision for your company. Ready to get into it? Welcome to Everyday AI. Before we do double down, let's zoom out and go over the big picture here. A viral chart I think is completely misleading enterprise buyers, and the media completely ate it up. Social media completely ate it up. So if you didn't see it, uh, we're gonna go over in more depth today the Ramp AI Index. So Ramp is a spend management platform, and they're claiming that Anthropic beat OpenAI in business AI adoption, but just based on their very limited and extremely skewed data set, that's not even very sound. Uh, so the Ramp AI Index reports went super viral online today, and normally when they release it once a month, it does kind of go viral, but the reason why it went mega viral today, and I think it's gonna continue to grab headlines, you know, throughout the rest of the week, is because at least according to their data, it's the first time that Anthropic overtook OpenAI in the enterprise. And we'll get into their methodology, which I said is bad, here in a couple of minutes. But here's the real facts, right? All we can do is base this on facts. We've seen all these numbers about Anthropic's reported revenue, their run rate, OpenAI's, right? It seems like they're kind of neck and neck now. The only thing we actually know until both of these companies go public and file all their pre-IPO paperwork, the only thing we know is OpenAI publicly reports 9 million paying business users. Well, Anthropic last confirmed 300,000 business customers. I'm not great at math, but that's roughly about 30x more for OpenAI. I know obviously not taking into account API spend and all these other things, But that's the gist. So on today's show, here's what we're going to uncover. You're going to learn why RAMP's Anthropic beat OpenAI headline doesn't match what RAMP actually measured and how it actually contradicts some of their own findings. I know, confusing. You're going to see how Microsoft and Google break the entire enterprise AI adoption story that RAMP is trying to sell you and why RAMP has a direct commercial incentive to hype all of this AI spend chaos and provider drama. All right, let's get into it. Welcome to Everyday AI. If you're new here, my name's Jordan Wilson and I do this every day. It's an unedited, unscripted livestream podcast and free daily newsletter helping everyday business leaders like me and you keep up with all of these AI advancements, all of these studies. I tell you, here's the facts, here's what's matter, uh, here's what matters, and you take that information to grow your company and your career. It starts here, but make sure you go to youreverydayai.com. That is your cheat code. It is the GenAI University. You can go now, listen, watch, read about 750+ episodes in our catalog, all free, and make sure you go sign up for the free daily newsletter. We're gonna be recapping today's podcast and a whole lot more. So let me just say this one bluntly. You can probably tell by the title of this episode, no, Anthropic isn't leading in enterprise AI adoption. They're leading in one very bad piece of data that was put out there, and I will break it down meticulously as I generally do. And yes, I hate doing these things over and over. You know, actually broke down a ton of bad studies last year in 2025 that stole the kind of narrative between the MIT study, the Menlo Ventures. So, you know, we have an early candidate for, you know, some of our bad studies for 2026. All right. But Let's look at it. So Ramp, if you don't know, they are a corporate card and spend management fintech platform serving, they say, 50,000+ businesses. So they published a report yesterday that they put out, I think just about every month, titled Anthropic Beats OpenAI on Business Adoption. So the report claims that Anthropic hit about 34.4% adoption amongst their customers, while OpenAI hit 32%. So, uh, I'll show you the chart here in a second. Uh, but here's the thing, and we're going to be, yeah, going deep on this one. Their, their, their metrics and methodology make absolutely no sense. All right, let me say this. I'm not an analyst by trade, all right, but I consult the biggest, um, uh, company that does analysis. Um, I, I do have a slight background in M&A in my, you know, nonprofit days. Just did a lot of M&A work measurement and value, measurement and evaluation work for Nike and Jordan Brand. You know, that's who our nonprofit partner, nonprofit partnered with for 10 years. Yeah, the thing, this thing is really unscripted. Sometimes I say the wrong words, right? So, and I'm a former journalist, right? I did that earlier in my career. One ACP Story of the Year. I was a Pulitzer Fellow. So, you know, I'm at least, I think, somewhat qualified to look at studies like this from a variety of different perspectives. Well, number one, is this telling the AI story, yes or no? Number two, is this sound, uh, in terms of its methodology, um, how this study was conducted? And last but not least, um, telling you, well, here's what's actually happening in the enterprise. So let's look at the Ramp AI Index. So this is, uh, from their, uh, kind of description. I'm not going to read the whole thing. I have a couple passages highlighted here on my screen. Uh, nothing super visual, but if you ever do want to see the video version of this, you can go to our website at youreverydayai.com. So here's, uh, some of the snippets describing, uh, their study and their methodology. So they say, our sample includes more than 50,000 American businesses and billions of dollars in corporate spends. Uh, firms are considered to have adopted AI tools if they have a positive transaction amount for an AI product or service in a given month. It's likely our results underestimate actual adoption rates. All right. There's some things, you know, insert some audible ellipses between those. Right. So there's, you know, just grabbing some different highlights here. Next, they say, well, Ramp customers don't skew toward tech startups. They skew high growth and tech forward. We've observed they are growing faster than the average US business and they are After all, adopting a tech-forward financial operations platform. Then they also say, and I found this one funny, we make no misrepresentations and we don't make claims if we're not confident about the work that got us there. Okay. All right. Let's look at this one. We make no misrepresentations. This goes back to my days as a journalist. You know, there's a saying, if it bleeds, it leads. Okay. So let's talk here, Ramp, about not making misrepresentations. Your heading here, in no shortage of words, says Anthropic beats OpenAI on business adoption. That is the definition of misrepresentation. This is— there's no asterisk on that headline. That headline is, well, it's misleading. It's not entirely accurate. It's an opinion. It's based on a very skewed and extremely miniature, uh, data set. All right, and then, yeah, we're going to get into this This is bad. This is the middle school math, y'all. We're going to get to this here in a second. All right. And then in the, the subheading here, it says today for the first time, Anthropic passes OpenAI in business adoption according to our latest release of Ramp AI Index. Yeah, put that in the headline, not in the subhead, right? No one reads this, this small print. It says adoption of Anthropic rose 3.8% in April to 34.4% of businesses. OpenAI adoption fell 2.9% to 32.3%. Overall AI adoption rose 0.2 percentage points to 50.6. All right. And then here's the chart, right? The chart that you're going to see a lot. Gosh, especially if you're on Twitter. FYI, go look at all the people who are sharing this and you're going to find out a lot of these people, they are Anthropic ambassadors. Just FYI. Besides the point, they can share this if they want, right? That's their own prerogative. But you always need to be like, look into who's sharing this and look into, well, what their motive may be. All right. Anyways, here is the, the RAMP AI index here that shows slowly over time. Right. So if you look back, you know, to January 2025 as an example, OpenAI, according to their data, had an overwhelming lead. And now for the first time in April 2026, their data shows Anthropic overtaking OpenAI for the lead. All right. And then obviously once this came out, it went viral. And I think it's going to continue to go viral, especially as OpenAI and Anthropic are now, you know, no longer quarters away. They are months away from filing their pre-IPO paperwork. So again, from being in journalism and understanding public relations and spin communication, there is going to be a lot of stories like this. And, you know, kind of this also, I think, goes to the the mythos is, the Anthropic Claude mythos is too powerful to release narrative, yet on benchmarks, their unreleased model is now getting passed by GPT-5.5 Pro. Microsoft came out and beat Anthropic's mythos in CyberGym, even though mythos is not available. And they said, cyber is its main capabilities. And I'm sure that Google is probably going to be announcing a new model at I/O next week. It's probably going to overtake Mythos on some of these benchmarks anyways. So much of what you have to— what you're seeing now coming out of Anthropic, way more than OpenAI, is usually just spin communication. And it's no surprise to me that as soon as this RAMP study hit, all of the brass at Anthropic were tweeting about this and saying, oh, we can't keep up with enterprise demand. Right. But I don't know. It doesn't look to me like ramp companies are true enterprise companies. I'm trying to see what percentage of, you know, ramp customers are Fortune 500 as an example, right? OpenAI says that 95% of the Fortune 500 uses OpenAI's products. So I was trying to see like, oh, what percentage is it? 90%, you know, you don't see any of that, right? It seems like they have a large customer base, but generally just kind of these tech-forward, quote unquote, tech-forward companies. But yeah, this thing is going viral. Uh, online, everyone's talking about it, the news, and you're going to continue to hear about it. So let's go over 9 reasons why I cut 2 out. Let's go over 9 reasons why you probably should ignore this quote unquote study. Um, but first, quick word from our partners.

Adobe just introduced an entirely new way to create, bringing the power and precision of its Creative Suite into one conversational experience. Meet Firefly AI Assistant, now live in the Adobe Firefly app, the all-in-one creative AI studio powered by Adobe's Creative Agents. Firefly AI Assistant lets you start with your vision, just describe what you want and shape the outcome as it takes form with the assistant. The assistant orchestrates multi-step workflows drawing on 60+ pro-grade tools across Adobe Creative Cloud apps, including Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Lightroom Express, and more to help bring your ideas to life. You can also get started with Creative Skills, a growing library of pre-built workflows for common creative tasks like batch editing photos, creating mood boards, portrait retouching, and creating social variations. Every step the assistant takes is visible, so you can refine, redirect, or take over at any time. You stay in the driver's seat as the creative director. Adobe Firefly AI Assistant, now in public beta.

See it today at firefly.adobe.com. All right, ready? Reason number 1: Ramp is measuring payments, not adoption. This is huge. All they're doing is they're saying, okay, this showed up in our system. So they're not measuring the number of employees using these. They're not measuring seats. They're not measuring usage. They're not measuring deployment. They're not technically measuring adoption. They're measuring something on a balance sheet. If a company pops up, yes or no, that's what they're measuring. Uh, you know, they're measuring whether a business had a paid transaction that Ramp could see. So calling that business adoption, well, that's just where the, uh, quote unquote study starts to really distort. All right, number 2, my gosh. All right. And I'm not trying to be mean here. Again, I'm a big fan of facts. All right. I'm not, I'm not the one putting out a study, right? Obviously on the podcast, this is live unedited too. Do, do I say things that could maybe be disproven down the line? Absolutely. If I'm putting out a quote unquote reputable study that I know each time I put it out, it's gonna get picked up by the media. I am going to emphasize truthfulness, making sure my numbers check out. This thing never should have seen the print, right? Let's just talk about some middle school math here. All right. Thanks, Mrs. Janice. I learned this in 7th grade. All right. The difference between percentage and percentage points. How can anyone take this seriously when Ramp itself seemingly doesn't know the difference between percentage and percentage points. All right, I'm not literally not making this up yet. So they said, all right, let me bring this up here and get my notes here as well. So they said, Anthropic passed OpenAI in business adoption according to our latest release of the RAMP AI Index. Adoption of Anthropic rose 3.8%. No, it didn't. Um, it rose according to their data 12.5%. So Ramp putting out this study and journalists wrote about it. Did they not read it? It took me 4 seconds and that's not an exaggeration. It took me 4 seconds to instantly know that the numbers here literally don't add up. Because I read that and I'm like, okay, I, I'm pretty okay at percentages in my head. And, you know, I'm, I'm doing the math and I'm like, no, that's like 12%, right? It was 12.5%. Uh, same, same thing with, you know, OpenAI. If, if you don't know the difference between, uh, percent and percentage points, probably shouldn't be putting out something that you're marketing as something reputable. Just saying. All right. Sorry. I mean, sorry, not sorry. I think it's important, right? Uh, so yeah, that's 12.5% relative growth, not up, you know, uh, 3.8% or what, whatever they said. Um, absolutely terrible. If you don't know the difference between percentage points, and percent. Don't put out a study. Yeah, and I did download the data. There's no data here, right? I mean, I mean, there's a spreadsheet. I've never seen anything that gets quoted so much in the media, right? Even going back to the terrible, you know, MIT 95% of, you know, AI pilots fail. At least they had 40 pages of bad information supporting it. This Ramp, I, I, and I'm not exaggerating their methodology. We had more content every single day in our newsletter. Their methodology is a, a couple paragraphs, right? They're, they're data points. You can go download it. It's a couple lines in a spreadsheet. There's like no real information. You can't actually choose, look into the methodology anywhere. Anyways, I, I did confirm that. Yeah. It's, it wasn't 3.8% increase, right? It's, it was, uh, 12.5% relative growth. Facts are important. All right, next. This is bigger than all of them, I think. Number 3 is the doozy. All right. One employee, in theory, and this is just technically an assumption, but Ramp, if I'm wrong here, call me out. Um, but it doesn't look like I am. Essentially, this is a yes or no. It's binary. It's 0 or 1, right? So one employee buying Claude can, would just count, right? If it shows up on their ramp card, right? Because of course, you know, PwC that has 100,000, you know, ChatGPT Enterprise seats is definitely putting that on their ramp card, right? Yeah, no, no, they're not. No one's putting these things on their card, FYI. you know, serious, serious companies. I've trained companies that have tens of thousands of seats both in Claude, um, and in, um, uh, ChatGPT. No one's putting these things in their Ramp card. First of all, clients I'm talking to, real enterprise clients, they've never heard of Ramp, number one. Uh, number two, yeah, people aren't using their credit card for this. Uh, anyways, according to my interpretation of the data and I could be wrong here, but I literally read the entire methodology and like I said, there's a couple paragraphs and it doesn't explain it. But the way that I read it and interpret it is that one employee buying Claude can count as a whole company. So it's the same thing, whether me, Everyday AI, right? I am checked, right? If I use Ramp and I, for my, you know, my Claude team account or whatever, you know, it's gonna count the exact same as someone, a company with 100,000, right? PWC, as you know, 100,000, uh, seats if they use their ramp card, right? That's all it is. It's, it's their customers and it's a percentage of those customers, which makes absolutely no sense. Like literally that if, if this is true, that example then probably plays out many times, right? And my assumption, and again, going back to the 30x, the last reported number of business customers we got from Anthropic was 300,000, and the last we got from OpenAI was 9 million, right? The assumption has always been that Anthropic initially has been developer-friendly, so smaller shops, tech-forward shops, right? So it makes sense that, you know, that is RAMP's crowd, so to speak. But this, this is useless. This, if, if, if this is true, which I think it is, the entire basis, let alone that they can't get their math right and don't know the difference between percentage and percentage points, but the, the, how you measured it, the, the methodology is, is bonkers. And the fact that journalists wrote about this is maybe even more bonkers. I don't know if I'm mad at Ramp or if I'm just more disappointed in the journalists that probably didn't read this or think about it. Think about it creatively, right? One thing I always love to do is open up these things in Claude, you know, I did this, open it up in Claude 4.7, open it up in GPT-5.5 Pro, open it up in, you know, Gemini DeepThink, give no context, make sure you know, temporary chat and just say, hey, is this study valid? Yes or no, right? They all said no. Because it doesn't make any sense. You know, Ramp isn't measuring adoption. They're measuring yes or no. To their current clientele that's already skewed to fit the Anthropic, right? Tech forward. That's your, for the most part, Anthropic, because it's people who are a little more dev heavy in 2025. All right, here's the next one that makes absolutely no sense. Let's go back real quick. Let's go back to this chart here. All right. Is there someone you don't notice on this chart? All right. We have Anthropic in the lead, then OpenAI, then Google. Then xAI, then Deepseek. Is there a name you don't see on there? Huh? The original AI enterprise leader, Microsoft's name is not on there. Huh? Microsoft has 450 million paid Microsoft 365 seats and a reported $37 billion+ AI annual recurring revenue. Huh. Weird. Weird. How does Microsoft not make the list here? Right? If that doesn't tell you that the audience is just, well, Anthropic, right? This quote unquote study should have just, or could for all intent and purposes, have been just conducted outside of Anthropic's Dev Day last week, right? If Microsoft doesn't make the list, for enterprise AI adoption. I mean, come on, I can't be the only one like chuckling at that. Like, it makes no sense, right? Absolutely absent, right? And Google barely makes the chart. So yeah, any enterprise AI chart talking about enterprise AI adoption missing Microsoft, you just made it a laughingstock. Number 5, RAMP's sample is not the market. I already alluded to this, right? So they said they use 50,000+ customers. uh, that's, that's a sliver, right? To call that, like, boldly to say this is enterprise adoption, we're not talking about 50 million businesses, we're not talking about 5 million, we're not talking about 500,000, talking about 50,000, right? Um, it's a very small sliver. Um, it's not a small sliver to put out a this is ramp enterprise AI adoption, that's fine. I'm good with that. To try to paint this as a picture of actual enterprise adoption, not just your sliver, your corner of the internet, it's, it's asinine to me, right? Um, also there's, there's other data that contradicts theirs. You know, there's some federal census data in terms of looking at overall, you know, AI utilization. I'm not going to get too much into that because it's already, you know, silly enough. So I actually thought of an analogy for this one, right? So Anthropix, or sorry, RAMP's sampling here, right? And trying to spin it the way that they're spinning it. This would be like me going to, I don't know, a neighborhood. I'm from Chicago. So let's say I go to the West Loop, right? And I do a study. And I say, all right, and I talk to every single person in the West Loop, right? There's probably 50,000 people. And, and I say, who's the best NFL team? Right? Overwhelmingly, probably gonna get the Bears as the 98%, right? And then I put that out, but in the headline, I don't say anything about West Loop residents, Chicago residents. Again, I used to write, help write headlines for a re— right, for, for a living. Uh, and if I just spin this as, well, The Bears are the best team in the NFL. And then all of a sudden some blogs pick it up and, oh my gosh, the Bears are the most popular team, right? And then sports radio, and then it's on ESPN all of a sudden, right? I'd be laughed at. So why are actual enterprise buyers? Why is the media? Why are people looking at this, right? I think it's human laziness. I don't think humans, they see a study, they see a headlines that, you know, they see someone You know, random influencer who, uh, you know, is tweeting it out and they're like, oh, it must be legit. Do, do people not read things anymore? Am I the, like, sometimes I feel, can someone email me? Can someone message me on LinkedIn and, and tell me like, did you read this study or do you just read the headlines? If you just read the headlines, like, that's fine. But sometimes I feel like I'm absolutely going crazy when, you know, I see all these things take off and I say, okay, like, let me look at it. And you know, it's obviously flimsy, flimsy at best. Yeah. Anyways, there's my Chicago Bears story. Would you see that headline and just turn and be like, huh, interesting, the Bears are the best by far? No, they're terrible. I love the Bears, but they're terrible, right? Same thing with this study. All right. Number 6, RAMP has a business reason to hype this. So RAMP sells AI spend intelligence, right, as part of their premium offering that they charge per seat. So when you can you know, get a splashy AI spend story out there, you know, that obviously makes Ramp and their spend intelligence tool look like, oh, well, we should probably be buying this. So this study for them not only doubles as market research, as great PR, but it's also sales collateral. So I always say, who funded the study and what do they have to gain from it monetarily? 7. RAMP's Anthropic optics are kind of bad here. All right. So Anthropic publicly features RAMP as a Claude code customer and reference account. Anthropic says that RAMP had direct communication channels with Anthropic engineers. RAMP's main competitor, Brex, has a very public partnership with OpenAI. And here's the one— and I'm not going to dive too deep into this because I don't want to stir the pot too much, but I did do the math here. 9 of 30 named RAMP investors overlap with Anthropic's latest Series G. Hmm. Interesting, right? And granted, right, there's some overlap with OpenAI investors as well, but I was seeing it was more like 12%, not a third. So roughly a third of RAMP investors and Anthropic's latest investors overlap. right? So I don't know, I'm putting myself in the shoes of one of those, um, Anthropic investors who's also a RAMP investor, and I could see how a study like this would, well, it would make your valuation go kaboomy, right? Because if you look, if you look, so just let's, let's look at a timeline, right? Real quick. So late 2025, Right. So right before this RAMP index started, which I believe it started in January of 2026. So let's look at late 2025. Anthropic's valuation was like $180 billion, right? Then the RAMP index, AI index came out. It showed, oh, Anthropic growing each month. It's growing. It's catching OpenAI, right? And that started to get picked up heavily on social media. It got a lot of play in mainstream media, even as the RAMP AI index showed that Anthropic was gaining. It got talked about a ton in the venture capital private equity circles. And now Anthropic's latest valuation is more than $900 billion. And am I saying that this valuation skyrocketing was due to RAMP's AI index? Absolutely not. Right. Anthropic has released some world-changing products that are Absolutely great. Did the RAMP AI Index influence the valuation every step of the way? I'd say absolutely, right? I've been following it. I've heard people talk about this in casual conversation. VC, VC and PE folks talk about this as if it's absolute truth, not knowing or understanding the methodology. All right. Number 8, their own data picks different winners. Yes. All right. So RAMP's AI Index that just came out. Says Anthropic beats OpenAI. All right. In their monthly metric. But they have something else called the RAMP rate, and it still ranks OpenAI first in generative AI category adoption. So which is it? RAMP's AI index says Anthropic wins in adoption, but RAMP rate says OpenAI is first in category adoption. Yes, really. It's here. so it says top-ranking generative AI software in May 2026, it's OpenAI. OpenAI was the most used vendor in the generative AI space as of May 2026, making it the top choice, right? So pretty, pretty confusing, right? I, I guess maybe it's in how they name it. I have no clue, but it seems like RAMP's even own data is contradicting itself. All right. And then last but not least, Last but not least, number 9, there's no audit, no error bars, no margins, no raw counts, nothing. Right? Again, I'm not kidding. I read their methodology. Unless there's another one out there, it's literally shorter than our daily newsletter. I want to see who these 50,000 businesses are. I want to see the actual, um, false positives, right? What do they count as a transaction? What do they not? Why don't they count seats? Why don't they count revenue? Right. I know that, you know, certain things in their dataset is anonymized, but why is there no seat weighting, spend weighting, employee weighting, stable panel audit? Right. All of those things that you would look for in any, any standard study that doesn't hold potentially this much weight. Right. These types of studies move markets, and they, they are going to greatly impact the public perception of these companies that are both going to be valued— and Anthropic and OpenAI, uh, by the time they go public, they're both going to be valued at over a trillion dollars on the market cap side, right? These types of studies are making probably, I would say, at least tens of billions of dollars in swing, right? But you don't even get any methodology, yet people are treating this as truth. All right, so let's end with some facts and stats. Here's what you have: 300,000 business customers for Anthropic, 9 million business users for OpenAI. Those are self-reported by the companies. Revenue, who knows what it is, right? Some of the latest reports now say Anthropic is ahead, but those are, for the most part, anonymous sources, right? Or you know, the company's hinting, oh yeah, now we're at $2 billion, right? But even with, if you look at revenue, Anthropic reports it differently than OpenAI. They're not, you know, essentially reporting their, you know, gross, you know, they're reporting it differently. So even the revenue numbers, a lot of it's, you know, anonymous sources or, you know, comparing apples versus, you know, banana pudding. So it's not good comparisons. The best comparisons we have right now until those numbers get filed. 300,000, uh, business customers for Anthropic, 9 million business users for OpenAI. And then you can look at other metrics, right? I'm like, okay, what else is there like an actual fact metric on? You can look at things like search volume, right? Are, what are people actually looking for? What are people searching for out there? Right? So I did a poll on that using some Google Trends, uh, Keywords Everywhere, data. So Claude for business, there's about 720 searches for that a month. ChatGPT for business, about 27,000. All right. So again, not great at math, but that is— let me do the math on there. So that's 10, 4, like 40x, right? Just about 40x more people demand, people searching for ChatGPT for business versus Claude for business. And that kind of checks because, well, at least right now there's 30x, uh, more paying customers. So that kind of checks. So for me, right, if I'm looking at the facts and the stats, let alone OpenAI has 900 million weekly active users and we don't know how many Anthropic has, um, I don't know, I would say OpenAI is probably still winning the enterprise. I could be wrong. but that doesn't matter. Like I said, this is not ultimately about who's winning the enterprise and who's not. It's about you. 'Cause I feel your pain. I feel the anxiety. I feel the, the pressure, right? I know who's listening to our show. You are making decisions like this. Are we gonna have that, you know, are we gonna commit to that $1 million should we spend with Anthropic to get, you know, to roll this out across our enterprise, right? Should we, you know, upgrade from, you know, 10,000 to 20,000 ChatGPT Enterprise seats? These decisions are not easy because there's a lot of misinformation, disinformation, marketing spin, pre-IPO narrative control out there. All I'm trying to do is give you the facts and stats as I see them, and that's what I'm gonna continue to do. So I hope this show was helpful, but it's maybe I'm just getting tired as the former journalist in me. I see these things take off and then I read these studies and I say, I am just so disappointed. Right. And I don't want you to be confused or have bad information out there. If nothing else, now I think, I hope instead of just reading this headline, you'll actually go read the Ramp study. Maybe you'll read it and be like, oh, this is great. This checks out. Cool. I just want you to be aware. All right. So I hope this was helpful. Uh, if, if it is, please take a minute to subscribe on the podcast. I'd appreciate that if you are listening on Apple Podcasts. If you're listening on Spotify, take a minute to follow the show. Leave us a rating there. That would really help us help more business users like you who just want the no BS straightforward approach. Uh, so you can get more of that if that's up your alley. On our website at youreverydayai.com. So thank you for tuning in. Hope to see you back tomorrow and every day for more Everyday AI. Thanks, y'all.

Meet Firefly AI Assistant, now live in Adobe Firefly, the all-in-one creative AI studio. Just describe what you want to create in your own words, and the assistant handles the rest, orchestrating multi-step workflows across Adobe Creative Cloud apps, including Photoshop, Premiere Express, and more in one conversational interface. You direct the outcome while the assistant accelerates execution. Stay in control with the ability to step in and refine at any time. See it today at firefly.adobe.com.

And that's a wrap for today's edition of Everyday AI. Thanks for joining us. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and leave us a rating. It helps keep us going! For a little more AI magic, visit youreverydayai.com and sign up to our daily newsletter so you don't get left behind. Go break some barriers and we'll see you next time!