AI has never been a cost leader, and I don't think that's a problem for AI. I think people were generally accepting of the AI cost premium (historically). But this isn't 2008 anymore (or even 2015), and I think the AI cost premium is going to come under pressure. Substitute products have caught up to AI, and in some regards surpassed them.
Back in the day it was a PITA getting a stock bedded and inlet for a DBM, working over an action (adding a pic rail, opening up it up for a DBM, truing, adding a recoil lug, upgrading the extractor and so on...), replacing the factory barrel, upgrading the trigger. You would do all that and it still wouldn't be as problem free as an AI, but it would cost as much. And it wouldn't switch barrels as well as an AI (well the post-14 AIs anyway). AI's were unique products.
Now... Anybody can throw together a problem free rifle for half the cost of an AI. Pick your action, pick your stock/chassis, pick your trigger. Pick your caliber, pick your bolt face. Switch barrel? No problem. Lightweight for hunting? No problem. Heavy for comps? No problem. 223 for low cost trigger time? no problem.
Again, AI doesn't need to be a cost leader to be successful. I'm not trying to armchair quarterback their business. I'm not trying to tear them down. They have made some of the coolest bolt action rifles ever. I'm happy to pay a premium for the AI cool factor... But $6500 for a short action rifle that I can't change bolts faces on in 2024? With a 3 piece, non-bonded chassis? It's not really a unique product, I'm having a hard time seeing the value... And I'm trying to see the value. By the time you put a scope on it, you'll be close to 10 grand. You can buy a high-performance motorcycle for 10K. I think we've jumped the shark on this precision rifle stuff. And I think that's the all the "haters" in this thread are saying.