메뉴
BL
TechCrunch AI 29일 전

리플릿 CEO, 커서 인수전·애플과의 싸움 그리고 독립 고집

IMP
8/10
핵심 요약

AI 코딩 어시스턴트 기업 리플릿(Replit)의 아므자드 마사드(Amjad Masad) CEO는 최근 매출이 급증하며 독자적인 생존이 가능하다고 강조했습니다. 그는 600억 달러에 인수될 가능성이 제기된 경쟁사 커서(Cursor)의 마진율이 마이너스 23%라는 점을 지적하며 리플릿은 1년 넘게 양의 총마진율을 유지해왔다고 밝혔습니다. 또한 애플의 앱스토어 정책과 관련해 소송도 불사하겠다는 입장과 함께, 자사 플랫폼 고객사에 직접 투자할 계획도 시사했습니다.

번역된 본문

아므자드 마사드(Amjad Masad)는 지난 10년간 리플릿(Replit)을 이끌어왔지만, 지난 18개월은 그야말로 전혀 다른 차원의 시기였습니다. 이 AI 코딩 어시스턴트 기업은 2024년 연간 280만 달러에 불과했던 매출에서 마사드가 말하는 '연간 10억 달러(약 1조 3,000억 원) 매출 런 레이트(Run Rate)' 달성을 눈앞에 두고 있습니다.

목요일 밤 샌프란시스코에서 열린 매진된 테크크런치(TechCrunch)의 'StrictlyVC' 행사에서 우리는 짧은 시간 동안 많은 이야기를 나눴습니다. 산업계의 모든 사람이 지금 묻는 질문, 즉 경쟁사인 커서(Cursor)가 스페이스X(SpaceX)에 600억 달러(약 8조 원)에 인수되는 것을 논의 중이라는 보도가 있는 상황에서 리플릿 역시 매각될 운명인지에 대한 것으로 대화를 시작했습니다.

우리는 또한 기존 고객의 지출이 얼마나 증가하는지를 나타내는 지표인 리플릿의 순수익 유지율(Net Revenue Retention)에 대해 이야기했는데, 마사드는 이 수치가 최대 300%에 달한다고 밝혔습니다. 또한 애플과의 앱스토어 분쟁에서 애플의 '노골적인 거짓말'에 맞서 법정에 설 준비가 되어 있다는 점, 그리고 리플릿이 자사 고객에 대한 직접 투자를 시작할 가능성에 대해서도 다루었습니다.

독립 경영과 관련해 마사드의 입장은 명확했습니다. 그는 총마진율(Gross Margin)이 -23%에 달했던 커서와는 달리, 리플릿은 독자 생존을 뒷받침할 수 있는 건실한 재무 구조를 갖추고 있다고 주장했습니다. 비록 매각 가능성을 완전히 배제하지는 않았지만 말입니다. (이하 분량 및 명확성을 위해 편집된 내용)

테크크런치(TC): 보도에 따르면 커서의 스페이스X 인수건은 지난주 업계의 뜨거운 화제였습니다. 어떻게 생각하시나요?

아므자드 마사드(AM): 파운데이션 모델(Foundation Model) 위에서 구축하는 독립적이고 규모가 작은 AI 기업으로서 살아남는 것은 꽤 어렵습니다. 특히 막대한 현금을 태우고 있다면 더욱 그렇습니다. 일부 보도에 따르면 커서는 마진율이 -23%라고 합니다. 그런 상황에서 모델 학습에 투자하려고 한다면 독립을 유지하기가 믿을 수 없을 정도로 어려워집니다.

반면 리플릿의 경우 부분적으로 다른 고객층을 타겟팅하고 있기 때문에 사업을 더 합리적으로 운영할 수 있었습니다. 우리는 1년이 넘게 양의 총마진율을 유지하고 있습니다. 우리는 약간 더 비싸지만, 훨씬 더 많은 가치를 제공합니다. 우리의 주된 고객층은 이전에는 소프트웨어를 전혀 만들 수 없었던 비전문가(Non-technical) 사용자들입니다.

우리는 프롬프트(Prompt) 입력부터 확장 가능한 배포된 애플리케이션에 이르기까지 엔드투엔드(End-to-End) 플랫폼을 제공합니다. 보안, 데이터베이스, 데이터베이스 마이그레이션을 모두 처리합니다. 우리는 이 일을 충분히 오래해왔기 때문에 플랫폼에 많은 핵심 기능(Primitives)을 구축할 수 있었습니다.

[테크크런치 행사 광고 본문 생략]

TC: 리플릿은 매각(Rule out a sale)할 계획이 있나요? 이사회의 수탁 책임(Fiduciary responsibility)상 항상 잠재적 인수자와 대화하고 있을 것이라고 생각합니다.

AM: 그렇습니다. 우리에게는 훌륭한 파트너들이 있으며, 그들이 가끔 이런 주제를 꺼내기도 합니다. 하지만 우리는 독립을 유지하려고 노력할 것입니다. 저는 우리가 독립적인 회사로 남기를 원합니다. 우리는 아이디어만으로 앱을 만들 수 있다는 사실이 받아들여지기도 전인 10년 전부터 존재했습니다. 2018년 YC(Y Combinator)에서 '10억 명의 소프트웨어 창작자 양성'에 대해 이야기했을 때, 사람들은 우리의 꿈을 비웃기도 했습니다.

이제 그 꿈은 현실이 되었습니다. 2024년 9월 우리의 에이전트 코딩(Agentic Coding) 경험을 통해 우리가 이 혁명의 포문을 열었습니다. 우리가 이를 훨씬 더 멀리까지 가져갈 수 있다고 느껴집니다.

TC: 앤스로픽(Anthropic), 구글(Google), 오픈AI(OpenAI)와 긴밀히 협력하고 있습니다. 이들의 순위를 매겨야 한다면 누가 가장 뛰어나다고 보시나요?

AM: 핵심 에이전트 루프(Agentic Loop) 측면에서는 앤스로픽이 여전히 무패입니다. 그들은 최고의 툴 콜링(Tool Calling) 기능을 갖추고 있으며, 에이전트가 훨씬 더 오래 일관성을 유지할 수 있습니다. GPT-5가 빠르게 뒤쫓고 있습니다. 구글의 플래시(Flash) 제품군도...

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
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-out StrictlyVC event in 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. Techcrunch event Meet your next investor or portfolio startup at Disrupt Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $410. Meet your next investor or portfolio startup at Disrupt Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $410. San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026 REGISTER NOW 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 an app-building app approved 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 environme