Billing Blindness | Risk Updates for Weeks of 1 July

Unbreakable Ventures

Billing Blindness | Risk Updates for Weeks of 1 July - 15 July '26

0:00

-16:07

Billing Blindness | Risk Updates for Weeks of 1 July - 15 July '26

Threat concerns this week: Executives are horrified by their AI bills. 72% of CEOs will pay more for resilience. And five quick fires on trade, weather and cyber.

Ollie Law, Brad Law, Martin Petts, and 2 others

Jul 15, 2026

Hello 👋 get a brew on because these are the top emerging risks between July 1st, and July 15th, 2026…

Review our report’s terminology here ↗

Our main risk this fortnight is…

1. Technological: AI Bills Blindside Corporate Leaders

A KPMG report surveyed 2,145 senior executives across 20 countries, finding 29% had no idea where growing AI costs came from, and a further third said their own cluelessness was a barrier to deploying AI.
The refrain from executives amid continuous job cuts has been that AI can do the job cheaper than human workers. But a new report issues a stark warning: that thinking is wrong, as business owners are aghast at their AI bills.
Though enterprises could once count on AI companies to subsidise large language models via flat-rate contracts, that is no longer a given, as rising computational costs force the tech sector into a defensive posture.
As scale increases, a new challenge is emerging. Only 26% of organisations have real-time visibility into the cost of running AI, and disciplined execution is now a core constraint.
“AI is now as much a financial management priority as it is a technology one,” Rob Fisher, global head of advisory at KPMG, said in a statement.

Sources

You should be concerned if…

Enterprises deep into AI deployment: As providers pivot from flat-rate to usage-based pricing, costs can escalate unpredictably. Firms that budgeted AI as a fixed overhead replacement for labour now face volatile, metered bills with limited real-time cost visibility.
Finance and procurement leaders: AI has become a financial management challenge, not just a technology one. Without forecasting and monitoring tools, teams risk approving deployments whose true operating cost only becomes clear after the meter runs.
Companies that cut staff expecting AI savings: Less than a quarter of CEOs in Malaysia report AI adoption generated additional revenue, and while 17% achieved cost reductions, 26% report AI actually increased their cost base. Savings promises may not materialise.
Boards and investors: Concentrated AI spending without governance creates financial exposure. Leadership teams lacking visibility into AI economics may over-commit capital to tools that fail to deliver measurable returns, straining margins already under macroeconomic pressure.
Small and mid-sized firms: With thinner buffers than large enterprises, unpredictable per-token costs can quickly outpace the value delivered, particularly for frequent, high-volume tasks where paying each time an action occurs becomes unsustainable.

These items are generic assumptions. We recommend considering your own unique risk landscape against your critical dependencies. If you don’t know what they are, get in touch.

Preventative actions

Build AI cost forecasting and monitoring capabilities

Establish real-time dashboards tracking token consumption, per-task costs, and departmental usage. As usage-based pricing models become more common, organisations are still building the capabilities required to forecast, monitor, and manage AI spending effectively. Close that gap now.

Renegotiate contracts and pricing models

Review supplier agreements before renewal. Where possible, lock in predictable pricing tiers or caps, and model total cost of ownership across flat-rate versus usage-based options before committing to any large-scale deployment.

Pilot before scaling

Run tightly scoped proofs of concept with defined budgets and success metrics before enterprise rollout. Measure actual cost-per-outcome rather than assuming AI replaces labour at lower cost, and pull the plug on tasks where economics do not add up.

Treat AI as a financial governance priority

Bring finance leaders into AI decision-making alongside technology teams. Assign clear accountability for AI budgets, require ROI reporting, and integrate AI spend into standard financial planning rather than treating it as an experimental line item.

Match the tool to the task

Not every process suits a probabilistic, per-use model. Assess task frequency and value carefully, reserving costly AI agents for high-value work while retaining cheaper deterministic automation or human processes where they remain more economical.

2. Economic: CEOs Pay Premium For Supply Resilience

Facing a continued environment of supply chain threats, businesses are becoming more risk averse and are willing to spend more money to ensure resilience, according to an industry survey from consulting firm Proxima.
Almost three quarters (72%) of CEOs said they would accept an increase of more than 10% on their current third-party supplier costs in order to guarantee supply chain resilience.
Threats were spread widely, with roughly equal responses (17-22%) listing conflict and geopolitical tensions, emerging technologies, sustainability and regulatory requirements, climate change and extreme weather, and protectionist policies such as tariffs.
Slightly more than half (51%) of surveyed global CEOs say their businesses could not maintain day-to-day operations for over three weeks without disruption if a major supply chain shock occurred tomorrow.
Nearly half (45%) of businesses have experienced a supply chain disruption caused by a cyber incident in the last 24 months.

Sources

You should be concerned if…

Businesses reliant on third-party suppliers: With most CEOs willing to absorb over 10% higher supplier costs for resilience, procurement budgets face upward pressure. Almost four in ten CEOs would pursue cost savings, 35% would pass rises to customers, and 26% would absorb costs through reduced margins.
Consumers and downstream buyers: As roughly a third of CEOs plan to pass supplier price rises on to customers, the cost of building resilience will surface in end prices, adding to inflationary pressure already fatiguing households.
Firms with limited operational buffers: With more than half of CEOs unable to sustain operations beyond three weeks after a major shock, thinly buffered businesses face existential risk from a single disruption to critical suppliers.
Organisations with weak cyber-supply visibility: With nearly half hit by a cyber-driven supply disruption in two years, firms lacking visibility into supplier cyber posture face a fast-growing and under-managed threat vector.
Investors and boards: Risk management considerations such as improving resilience, plus flexibility and agility, have displaced cost-efficiency as the top drivers of network changes. Capital allocation strategies must adapt to this structural shift.

Preventative actions

Diversify and dual-source critical inputs

Companies are diversifying international supply chains, introducing alternative sources to reduce exposure to localised trade risk or achieve local content requirements. Add supplier nodes incrementally rather than attempting a costly full realignment.

Stress-test operational continuity

With half of CEOs unable to operate beyond three weeks after a shock, model worst-case scenarios against your own runway. Identify which suppliers, if disrupted, would halt operations fastest and build targeted buffers around them.

Close cyber-supply-chain visibility gaps

Given the volume of cyber-driven supply disruptions, extend cyber risk assessment beyond your own perimeter to critical suppliers. Require security attestations, monitor tier-one vendors continuously, and factor cyber exposure into supplier selection.

Fund resilience deliberately, not reactively

Decide in advance whether resilience uplifts will be funded through efficiency gains, price increases, or margin absorption. A planned funding strategy avoids crisis-driven decisions that damage customer relationships or profitability.

Embed scenario planning and risk ownership

Prioritise risk identification, implement scenario planning, and create organisational units dedicated to managing risks. Define business continuity plans so companies can anticipate and mitigate risks before they affect operations.

Quick snippet stories

Malaysian Business Confidence Turns Pessimistic
Business confidence in Malaysia weakened in Q1 2026 as companies grew cautious over geopolitical tensions and cost pressures, with the RAM Business Confidence Index falling to 42.2 from 53.1, back below the 50-point optimism threshold. The risk is that heightened Middle East tensions have pressured energy markets, contributing to rising fuel prices and supply chain disruptions. Diversify sourcing and hedge energy exposure.
Main link to resource
Insurer Warns of Super El Niño Supply Shock
TT Club is calling on supply chain operators worldwide to review risk and resilience strategies amid growing forecasts of a “super” El Niño event. The Panama Canal Authority has tightened draft restrictions amid forecasts of reduced rainfall. Build inventory buffers and integrate seasonal climate intelligence into planning.
Main link to resource
Australian Businesses Rank Most Fragile Globally
Australia faces the greatest vulnerability among surveyed markets, with only 5% of firms able to sustain operations for 4 to 6 months during disruption, while 21% can only survive one to two weeks and 59% would fail within three weeks. The risk is compounded by geographic isolation and extended lead times. Prioritise local and regional sourcing and critical-input buffers.
Main link to resource
Hormuz Disruption Threatens Beyond Oil
Disruption in the Strait of Hormuz spells trouble for global markets well beyond crude, hitting shipping, LNG, and broader trade flows. The risk is compounding: any slowdown in the Panama Canal would leave carriers facing simultaneous slowdowns across three of the world’s most vital shipping corridors alongside existing Hormuz and Suez disruptions. Map alternative routes and secure freight capacity early.
Main link to resource
Geopolitical Tensions Reshape Global Trade Strategy
Escalating geopolitical friction is forcing businesses to rethink risk and exposure across markets. The risk is systemic. As global commerce becomes driven by political alliances rather than pure efficiency, diplomatic disputes can trigger tariffs, sanctions, or barriers that halt supply chains overnight. Diversify markets, build regional alliances, and stay adaptable.
Main link to resource

AI Risk Flow Graph

Using the data of our AI based threat intelligence scraper, we can see trends of events per threat category over time. This fortnight, the largest increase in events comes under (1) Geopolitical, (2) Technological, (3) Economic, (4) Societal, (5) Environmental.

Want to discuss how these risks might effect your business?
Book 30 minutes with us, free ↗

Need support?

At Fixinc, we are passionate about helping people get through disasters. That’s why our team of Advisors bring you this resource free of charge. If you need help understanding these threats and building a plan against them, the same Advisors are here to help over a 30-minute online call. Once complete, if you like what was provided, you can choose to provide a donation or subscribe to Unbreakable Ventures to support this channel.

Book your 30min call here

Help us help people just like you. Share this post today and spread the support 🤝