3 ms·

Can't wait to see those revenue numbers.

by cdrnsf 5mo ago

4lx87 5mo ago
OpenAI reported ~$20 billion annualized revenue for 2025, up from $6 billion the year before.
- cdrnsf 5mo ago
  And that covers their model training and infrastructure costs?
  - spongebobstoes 5mo ago
    each new model brings in revenue that is multiple times the cost to create said model
    - cdrnsf 5mo ago
      So their CFO's publicly voiced concerns are unwarranted?
      - rchaud 5mo ago
        The efficient market hypothesis has taken a real beating in the age of tech industry anti-gravity valuations.
    - jddj 5mo ago
      Is that the case? What about gpt 4.5? o1-pro?
      - spongebobstoes 5mo ago
        with revenue >2x cost, they can afford to have a miss now and then
        jddj 5mo ago
        If you have a machine that reliably takes $1 and makes $2 you raise debt not equity
        bdangubic 5mo ago
        care to elaborate? if my machine is doubling my money, why do I have to raise debt?
        jddj 5mo ago
        Presumably there is some time component, i.e you need to use the machine quickly or risk losing it. Also, it's better to double $2 instead of $1, and then pay back that $1.1 and end up with $2.9 instead of $2. But it was a more facetious comment than I would have preferred to make, I actually went to delete it but you got in too quickly. There are many reasons it's wrong, too, eg. at some level of risk debt becomes more expensive or impossible But the intent of the comment was to say that if you owned as sure a thing as the GP proposed you'd do what you could to avoid selling parts of it.
    - m_ke 5mo ago
      until it doesn't. scaling laws are a power law, you can only stay ahead for so long when each minor improvement gets exponentially more expensive
  - downrightmike 5mo ago
    exactly
jmye 5mo ago
Agree, deeply interested in their books and then whatever report cadence we end up on next year. I understand that a lot of people want to cash out, but I'm surprised they're ready to share, especially given I don't think they've had issues bringing in funding in the private markets, but maybe I'm wrong.
- jddj 5mo ago
  At one point (1.5 months ago) Bloomberg posted a piece saying the private market was apparently drying up for openai due to anthropic sucking all the oxygen out of the room. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-01/openai-demand-sinks-on-secondary-market-as-anthropic-runs-hot https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-01/openai-de...
Aboutplants 5mo ago
I’m less interested in revenue and more interested in their operational costs
- aurareturn 5mo ago
  I'm personally interested in their growth rate more than anything else. I'm not a believer that AI can't be profitable and has no moat narrative that is popular here. Both Altman and Dario have consistently said inference margins are high.

Can't wait to see those revenue numbers.

by cdrnsf 5mo ago

Can't wait to see those revenue numbers.

4lx87 5mo ago

OpenAI reported ~$20 billion annualized revenue for 2025, up from $6 billion the year before.

cdrnsf 5mo ago
And that covers their model training and infrastructure costs?
- spongebobstoes 5mo ago
  each new model brings in revenue that is multiple times the cost to create said model
  - cdrnsf 5mo ago
    So their CFO's publicly voiced concerns are unwarranted?
    - rchaud 5mo ago
      The efficient market hypothesis has taken a real beating in the age of tech industry anti-gravity valuations.
  - jddj 5mo ago
    Is that the case? What about gpt 4.5? o1-pro?
    - spongebobstoes 5mo ago
      with revenue >2x cost, they can afford to have a miss now and then
      - jddj 5mo ago
        If you have a machine that reliably takes $1 and makes $2 you raise debt not equity
        bdangubic 5mo ago
        care to elaborate? if my machine is doubling my money, why do I have to raise debt?
        jddj 5mo ago
        Presumably there is some time component, i.e you need to use the machine quickly or risk losing it. Also, it's better to double $2 instead of $1, and then pay back that $1.1 and end up with $2.9 instead of $2. But it was a more facetious comment than I would have preferred to make, I actually went to delete it but you got in too quickly. There are many reasons it's wrong, too, eg. at some level of risk debt becomes more expensive or impossible But the intent of the comment was to say that if you owned as sure a thing as the GP proposed you'd do what you could to avoid selling parts of it.
  - m_ke 5mo ago
    until it doesn't. scaling laws are a power law, you can only stay ahead for so long when each minor improvement gets exponentially more expensive
- downrightmike 5mo ago
  exactly

jmye 5mo ago

Agree, deeply interested in their books and then whatever report cadence we end up on next year. I understand that a lot of people want to cash out, but I'm surprised they're ready to share, especially given I don't think they've had issues bringing in funding in the private markets, but maybe I'm wrong.

jddj 5mo ago
At one point (1.5 months ago) Bloomberg posted a piece saying the private market was apparently drying up for openai due to anthropic sucking all the oxygen out of the room. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-01/openai-demand-sinks-on-secondary-market-as-anthropic-runs-hot https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-01/openai-de...

Aboutplants 5mo ago

I’m less interested in revenue and more interested in their operational costs

aurareturn 5mo ago
I'm personally interested in their growth rate more than anything else. I'm not a believer that AI can't be profitable and has no moat narrative that is popular here. Both Altman and Dario have consistently said inference margins are high.