How to get rich without using AI in 2026

Why does it matter? Because the tool everyone's racing to adopt might be the most expensive distraction of the decade.

Hormozi's wealthiest friends are publicly beating the AI drum. Privately, they admitted to him directly: they're not using it themselves — and their revenues are still climbing. What follows is a constraint-first argument for why more AI, pointed in the wrong direction, just makes failure happen faster.

• Token bills are climbing; revenue isn't following for most businesses.
• The highest-leverage move available to any operator is a good decision — not a better tool.
• Structural changes — going from 1:1 to 1:10 delivery — produce 10x leverage with zero tech investment.
• The diagnostic is binary: has AI made you more money? If not, you're solving the wrong problem.

AI expands your capacity to work — which mostly means faster execution on whatever you were already doing wrong

More throughput applied to the wrong constraint is just expensive distraction. Hormozi watched it play out across his network: "their capacity to work has increased using AI, they are now doing things they otherwise would not have done if they didn't have AI. But the thing is, those things that they otherwise wouldn't have done were lower priorities."

The result: "they're doing things that were less important faster and automated. Great. Not great. It doesn't matter is my point."

The failure mode isn't using AI badly. It's using AI before diagnosing what's actually bottlenecking the business. Capacity and constraint are different things — applying more of the former to anything other than the latter produces zero revenue lift. "For most people, they're using it on things to be more distracted because they have more resources now. They are still making poor decisions about how to allocate those resources."

More resources only matter when aimed at the right target. Pointed anywhere else, they're noise.

The wealthiest AI advocates in public aren't using it privately — and their revenues don't care

His wealthiest friends aren't using AI. He asked directly. They looked around the room and said: "Dude, I'm not using AI." Teams, sure — but the operators themselves, no.

"Of course, we're here. We're all super AI advocates because you have to do that." Public advocacy is partly performance — positioning for the current moment, not evidence of what's driving the top line.

His own business just hit a step-change in revenue. "It's not because of AI. That's the thing. It's not because of AI. If AI didn't exist, we still would have had the increase."

Benchmark your AI adoption against what's moving the number in your business — not against what founders say on stages. Those two things are rarely the same.

Deciding something is NOT a priority beats automating it — every time

"I think it is more efficient for me to determine that something is not a priority than for me to automate something that is not a priority." He paused, acknowledged how sharp that was, then kept going.

The logic holds. Automate an irrelevant output and you've built a machine for producing irrelevant outputs faster. The multiplier on wrong direction is always zero.

"I will get more out of this resource that I have, my team, than if I just try and automate it and then create an output that is irrelevant."

Run the stop-doing audit before any automation conversation. Elimination beats acceleration. "Our skill at being able to focus that tiny speck of resource on the one thing that's going to move the needle is the thing that will ultimately make you more money, even more than AI."

Capital, media, and people still multiply each other — AI canceled none of it

"AI coming in didn't somehow erase the leverage that capital uses." A video reaching millions is massive leverage. Capital still compounds. Teams still multiply individual output. Even the frontier labs with all that AI still have thousands of employees — a fact Hormozi finds pointedly ironic.

The mistake is treating AI as the only lever worth pulling while the ones that have always compounded hardest — capital, distribution, organizational design — sit underutilized.

Stack them. Capital plus media plus team structure, with AI applied where it solves the actual constraint. Bad offer plus AI still equals bad offer. The businesses growing right now are generating demand, converting a higher percentage of it, and delivering quality. "AI can help, but it's like having access to a lot of virtual assistants" — useful, not transformational on its own.

Going from 1:1 to 1:10 delivery is an instant 10x — zero tech required

Most operators are hunting marginal AI efficiency gains while walking past structural changes that produce step-function improvements with no technology expertise required.

"If you want one-on-one to one-on-10, you have 10x leverage. Like just like that with that one decision." Sync to async delivery: immediate headcount leverage. Redesign the sales motion so prospects arrive more educated: "instead of needing 10 sales people, need two and they close the same amount because you've basically educated your prospects throughout the sales process more fully so they need less information to make a decision." Ten reps to two. Same output.

"None of that uses AI. This is my point is that there's so many places in a business where you can increase leverage."

Structure before software. The structural move is faster, cheaper, and carries no ongoing token spend.

One question settles whether your AI investment is working — and most operators won't like the answer

"'Has implementing AI in my business made me more money?' If it hasn't, then you were likely using it in the wrong place."

That's the full diagnostic. Answer is no? Stop all AI initiatives. Spend that time identifying whether the constraint is demand, conversion, delivery quality, or pricing — then put everything there.

"If you don't know what the constraint of the business is, you just doing more automated does not make you more money."

Business constraints, at least at this point, aren't reliably solved by AI. If they were, everybody would be making a lot more money. They're not.

The operators who win won't have the highest token bills

The businesses that pull ahead will be the ones with the clearest picture of what's actually limiting them — not the ones with the most sophisticated AI stack. AI as a first move, before that diagnosis, just accelerates drift. Hormozi's argument isn't anti-AI. It's pro-constraint. Most operators have a resource-allocation problem dressed up as a technology problem.

AI is just a tool. It's not the answer.

---

Topics: AI, leverage, business strategy, prioritization, constraint theory, business model design, sales efficiency, decision-making, productivity