Despite what the “God of Prompt” (sic!) or any other self-proclaimed “AI expert” is trying to tell you, none of the current AI models will replace a multi-hundred-thousand-dollar product strategy project.
First of all, the people making these claims are, most likely, just trying to sell you their overpriced list of “magic” prompts — and hoping for endorsement from the big AI companies or a retweet from Elon Musk.
But giving the AI tools the benefit of the doubt, I tried using Grok, ChatGPT, and Claude to iterate on a commercial strategy for poketto.me. The results were… disappointing. Here are the main issues:
🤯 The “knowledge” these models peddle is often just factually incorrect. They hallucinate competitors and/or their features into existence, then make bold claims about your strategy based on those confabulations. If you don’t sit down to validate each minor claim they make, you’re in deep trouble. And if you do that… then why rely on the AI in the first place?
🤯 Their reasoning is frequently overly optimistic. Not only is ChatGPT massively sycophantic (“This is a great idea!”), but none of the models offer a true reality check. If you trusted them blindly, you could easily make terrible investment decisions based on false optimism about user growth, expected revenue, and the like.
🤯 Their recommendations are sometimes so biased it’s almost funny. One example: when I asked Grok for ideas on naming a potential “premium” price tier for poketto.me, it literally suggested “SuperPoketto” — following Elon Musk’s favorite naming scheme (SuperCharger, SuperGrok, etc.).
What they can do (and Grok especially) is produce nice, plausible-looking slides. And sure, some ideas might spark your curiosity. But what they can’t do is replace a person who actually does the research, reasons things through, and ultimately takes responsibility if things go wrong.