5 ms·

IPO is to leave someone holding the bag, right? The narrative has really changed from AGI, the most consequential technology, blabla. If I had that I would keep

by andy99 1y ago

IPO is to leave someone holding the bag, right? The narrative has really changed from AGI, the most consequential technology, blabla. If I had that I would keep it private. If I wanted to cash out, I’d do an IPO. Is there a narrative that doesn’t make it seem like pump and dump?

linuxftw 1y ago
In the before times, companies went public to raise capital in order to grow their business.
- andy99 1y ago
  Does that seem like what’s happening here?
  - linuxftw 1y ago
    Maybe? They want to grow the company, and they've run out of VC and circular financing money. Are they going to use the capital raised to make actual profits? That's the question.
  - techblueberry 1y ago
    If they’re on the path to AGI, there’s probably a predictable cost structure to get us to the point where these models are self-reinforcing and we get fast takeoff. This is the dumbest they’ll ever be remember.
- sexeriy237 1y ago
  It hasn't been like that for quite some time. The corpse is sold off to mutual funds and pension plans
derekdahmer 1y ago
They have 800M weekly active users that have yet to be monetized but enormous capital costs. It makes sense they'd be looking to raise large amounts of money in an IPO.
- FinnKuhn 1y ago
  How many of these users will be able to be monitized is an unanswered question as of yet however. API usage on the other hand has a clear path to monetization and as of right now Anthropic is looking a lot better than OpenAI there.
  - deepdarkforest 1y ago
    Everyone. People are becoming dependent on chatgpt. They literally cannot function professionally or even socially without it. They will pay their last 20-30 dollars if needed. It's literally like a drug especially when it's asking you if you want to followup/continue.
    - FinnKuhn 1y ago
      Everyone also uses Google, YouTube or Instagram. No one would ever pay for any of it though and it is financed through ads. So far it is unclear, if this is also a viable option for chatgpt.
      - x187463 1y ago
        YouTube Premium has over 125 million subscribers.
        FinnKuhn 1y ago
        Out of about 2.7 billion users. So about 5% of all users are subscribed to YouTube. If the same were true then Open AI at 1 billion weekly users they should have about 50 million subscribers. Right now that numbers sits at 20 million though and growth is slowing down. [1] So people are more willing to pay for YouTube than ChatGPT and that is ignoring that YouTube is still largely relying on ad revenue and can only allow itself to have more and more ads as there are no alternatives. Open AI has plenty of competitors that would love to offer users free access if ChatGPT were to start showing you ads. [1] https://fortune.com/2025/10/14/openai-subscriptions-flatlined-europe-deutsche-bank/ https://fortune.com/2025/10/14/openai-subscriptions-flatline...
tim333 1y ago
I was watching the OpenAI livestream yesterday. Sam was saying they have a $1.4 tn financial obligation to build 30 GW worth of data centers https://youtu.be/ngDCxlZcecw?t=1179 https://youtu.be/ngDCxlZcecw?t=1179 That's a lot of money to raise given they have no earnings. He also says they are talking about being able to build 1 GW a week at a cost of $20bn/GW I find it all a bit worrying. Weren't we supposed to be careful with energy use to reduce CO2 emissions? Could the billions maybe better deployed to schools hospitals, housing and the like rather than chatbots? Rather than a fictional paperclip maximising AI eating the world we have a chatbot maximising Altman trying to do so?
- akimbostrawman 1y ago
  >Weren't we supposed to be careful with energy use to reduce CO2 emissions? The Programming has changed get with the times. AI earnings have outweigh ESG scores.
- gsibble 1y ago
  You didn't notice as soon as energy was needed for AI, all the tech companies gave up on green power and reducing emissions?
  - okdood64 1y ago
    Nuclear doesn't reduce emissions?
    - Annatar01 1y ago
      It does, but its partly just the hot thing because you can increase energy usage without going back on CO2 promises. They certainly arent reducing energy usage rn which could theoretically be a puzzle piece of reducing CO2.
- johnnienaked 1y ago
  [flagged]
sschueller 1y ago
IPO day would be a great time for someone else to release a revolution of an open model to the public...
MagicMoonlight 1y ago
Yeah, it's a pump and dump. You wouldn't sell AGI for any amount of money. You'd literally be a god king. You could build an army of sentient robots and just seize entire countries.

by andy99 1y ago

linuxftw 1y ago

In the before times, companies went public to raise capital in order to grow their business.

andy99 1y ago
Does that seem like what’s happening here?
- linuxftw 1y ago
  Maybe? They want to grow the company, and they've run out of VC and circular financing money. Are they going to use the capital raised to make actual profits? That's the question.
- techblueberry 1y ago
  If they’re on the path to AGI, there’s probably a predictable cost structure to get us to the point where these models are self-reinforcing and we get fast takeoff. This is the dumbest they’ll ever be remember.
sexeriy237 1y ago
It hasn't been like that for quite some time. The corpse is sold off to mutual funds and pension plans

derekdahmer 1y ago

They have 800M weekly active users that have yet to be monetized but enormous capital costs. It makes sense they'd be looking to raise large amounts of money in an IPO.

FinnKuhn 1y ago
How many of these users will be able to be monitized is an unanswered question as of yet however. API usage on the other hand has a clear path to monetization and as of right now Anthropic is looking a lot better than OpenAI there.
- deepdarkforest 1y ago
  Everyone. People are becoming dependent on chatgpt. They literally cannot function professionally or even socially without it. They will pay their last 20-30 dollars if needed. It's literally like a drug especially when it's asking you if you want to followup/continue.
  - FinnKuhn 1y ago
    Everyone also uses Google, YouTube or Instagram. No one would ever pay for any of it though and it is financed through ads. So far it is unclear, if this is also a viable option for chatgpt.
    - x187463 1y ago
      YouTube Premium has over 125 million subscribers.
      - FinnKuhn 1y ago
        Out of about 2.7 billion users. So about 5% of all users are subscribed to YouTube. If the same were true then Open AI at 1 billion weekly users they should have about 50 million subscribers. Right now that numbers sits at 20 million though and growth is slowing down. [1] So people are more willing to pay for YouTube than ChatGPT and that is ignoring that YouTube is still largely relying on ad revenue and can only allow itself to have more and more ads as there are no alternatives. Open AI has plenty of competitors that would love to offer users free access if ChatGPT were to start showing you ads. [1] https://fortune.com/2025/10/14/openai-subscriptions-flatlined-europe-deutsche-bank/ https://fortune.com/2025/10/14/openai-subscriptions-flatline...

tim333 1y ago

I was watching the OpenAI livestream yesterday. Sam was saying they have a $1.4 tn financial obligation to build 30 GW worth of data centers https://youtu.be/ngDCxlZcecw?t=1179 https://youtu.be/ngDCxlZcecw?t=1179 That's a lot of money to raise given they have no earnings. He also says they are talking about being able to build 1 GW a week at a cost of $20bn/GW I find it all a bit worrying. Weren't we supposed to be careful with energy use to reduce CO2 emissions? Could the billions maybe better deployed to schools hospitals, housing and the like rather than chatbots? Rather than a fictional paperclip maximising AI eating the world we have a chatbot maximising Altman trying to do so?

akimbostrawman 1y ago
>Weren't we supposed to be careful with energy use to reduce CO2 emissions? The Programming has changed get with the times. AI earnings have outweigh ESG scores.
gsibble 1y ago
You didn't notice as soon as energy was needed for AI, all the tech companies gave up on green power and reducing emissions?
- okdood64 1y ago
  Nuclear doesn't reduce emissions?
  - Annatar01 1y ago
    It does, but its partly just the hot thing because you can increase energy usage without going back on CO2 promises. They certainly arent reducing energy usage rn which could theoretically be a puzzle piece of reducing CO2.
johnnienaked 1y ago
[flagged]

sschueller 1y ago

IPO day would be a great time for someone else to release a revolution of an open model to the public...

MagicMoonlight 1y ago

Yeah, it's a pump and dump. You wouldn't sell AGI for any amount of money. You'd literally be a god king. You could build an army of sentient robots and just seize entire countries.