Nine months. That's all it took for Manus AI to go from being called an "unusable shell product" to closing a $2 billion acquisition with Meta.
This isn't just an acquisition story. It's a signal about where AI is heading, and what it means if you're building products in this space.
The Demo That Broke the Internet
March 2025. Manus drops a demo that immediately goes viral. The pitch was simple but revolutionary: this is the first "general AI agent," an AI that actually does things, not just talks about them.
You give it a task. You watch it plan. You watch it execute. You get real results.
No wall of text. No "here's how you could do it." Actual output.
"The AI that DOES" became Manus's viral tagline, and it hit different. This wasn't another chatbot. This was something new.
The hype was immediate and intense. Invite codes were selling for $14,000 on Xianyu, China's secondary marketplace. People were calling it the next DeepSeek moment. The transparency layer, where you could literally watch every action the agent takes in real time, felt genuinely innovative.
But here's the thing about hype. It's a loan you have to pay back with results.
And Manus was about to default.
The Brutal Backlash
Chinese social media turned hostile fast. The accusations were brutal and specific:
- "Pure shell product": critics claimed it was just a wrapper on Claude with nothing original
- "Hunger marketing": accusations that they raised money and ran
- 800 credits to upload a single file, users were burning through resources on basic tasks
- Reddit threads calling it "absolutely unusable"
Most startups die at this stage. Once the "scam" narrative takes hold, you can't outmarket your way out of it. The product had real problems, and the court of public opinion had already rendered its verdict.
When your product is called a "shell product" by the very market you're trying to capture, that's usually a death sentence.
But Manus didn't die. They made a decision that would change everything.
The $100 Million Resurrection
Instead of chasing Twitter virality, Manus started chasing invoices. They went completely heads down on product.
June 2025: Playbook templates launched, pre built task flows that cut credit consumption by 30%. Users could now accomplish complex workflows without burning through their allocation.
July 2025: Chat Mode introduced, simple queries now used 5 credits instead of 100. The product became actually usable for everyday tasks.
Then the enterprise deals started landing. Mercury Law, a UK firm, started using Manus for contract review and reported 40% time savings. Shanghai Zenith Advertising adopted it for campaign automation. Beijing consultancies integrated it into research workflows.
Real companies. Real invoices. Real validation.
By December 2025: $100 million ARR. Two million users.
From "shell product" to nine figure revenue in six months. That's not a pivot. That's a resurrection.
Why Meta Paid $2 Billion in 10 Days
Normal M&A takes months of due diligence. Legal review. Integration planning. Negotiation rounds.
Meta closed in 10 days.
That's not strategic M&A. That's desperation. And when you understand the competitive landscape, it makes perfect sense.
Here's what Meta was facing:
- Google: Gemini Agents rolling out across Workspace
- Microsoft: Copilot embedded in everything, everywhere
- OpenAI: Function calling agents shipping rapidly
- Anthropic: Claude becoming the go to for agentic workflows
Everyone was moving. Meta was stuck.
Meta didn't just buy revenue. They bought an agentic architecture they were years behind on building themselves.
And here's what nobody's talking about: Meta is quietly shifting away from open source. They're building a proprietary model codenamed "Avocado." The "Llama is free forever" era? That's changing. They need revenue from AI, not just developer goodwill.
According to Gartner, 40% of enterprise apps will have AI agents by end of 2026, up from 5% the year prior. Meta paid $2 billion to be on the right side of that shift.
What This Means for Developers
This acquisition isn't just a Manus story. It's a signal about where AI is heading, and what it means if you're building products today.
Chatbots chat. Agents act.
The difference is fundamental:
| Chatbots | AI Agents |
|---|---|
| Respond to prompts | Execute multi step tasks |
| Generate text | Deliver outcomes |
| Require human orchestration | Operate autonomously |
| Useful for Q&A | Useful for work |
The transparency layer that Manus pioneered, watching the AI think, plan, and execute in real time, is becoming table stakes. Users don't just want answers anymore. They want to see the work happening.
If you're building AI products, the question isn't "how do I make my chatbot smarter?" It's "how do I make my AI actually do things?"
That's the paradigm shift. And Big Tech is paying billions to catch up.
Key Takeaways
The Manus story offers several lessons for anyone watching, or building in, the AI industry:
Product beats narrative. All the viral marketing in the world couldn't save Manus when the product failed. Only fixing the product did. The criticism was valid. They addressed it. That's what mattered.
Enterprise revenue validates. $100M ARR in six months turned "shell product" criticism into a $2B exit. Revenue is the ultimate credibility signal.
Timing matters more than ever. Meta was behind on agents precisely when the market shifted from chatbots to agents. That timing created a $2B opportunity.
Speed signals desperation. 10 day M&A cycles don't happen unless someone is scared of being left behind. Meta was scared.
From shell product to $2 billion in 9 months. Failure to acquisition. Hate to exit.
That's the Manus story. And it's a preview of how fast the AI industry moves, and how quickly fortunes can reverse.
Let's Discuss 💬
What's your take on the chatbot to agent shift? Are you building anything with agentic AI? I'd love to hear your experience in the comments.
Follow me for more AI and tech breakdowns. For deeper analysis, subscribe to Oak Codex Newsletter for FREE.
Top comments (0)