I disagree. Market saturation is absolutely determined partly by competition, and partly by how much consumers are , well, able to consume. In terms of competi

I disagree. Market saturation is absolutely determined partly by competition, and partly by how much consumers are , well, able to consume. In terms of competition, we've seen plenty of alternative pop up recently such as Mattermost and MS Teams, both of which have gained popularity. In terms of consumption, it is only feasible to really have a single chat application at a time, maybe two if one is being tested. Having more than 1 defeats the purpose of having an org wide chat. Maybe individual teams will choose their own in large companies, but the general assumption is you try and sell your chat solution to the company, not to the individuals. And so we have a situation where the presence of strong competition directly effects the consumption of the product (Slack's offering). My opinion is that Slack was previously somewhat synonymous with company chat, but that is no longer the case. They peaked, and now that Discord, MS Teams, Mattermost, etc. are viable alternatives, their market saturation is on the decline. They let their grasp slip away, and they will pay for it.