4 ms·
There is no evidence they are losing money on inference, though? Also if they are keeping the price low because they want to gain market share and reduce the c
by qwytw 2mo ago
There is no evidence they are losing money on inference, though?
Also if they are keeping the price low because they want to gain market share and reduce the competitiveness of Chinese models they won't be able to raise prices without providers serving open models (at cost + low margin) severely undercutting them.
- vehemenz 2mo agoThere's no evidence they're making money, and we already know from the projected datacenter capacity in a few years that there will be for more supply than demand, so the major providers will have to repay that debt. Even if they are making money on inference, it's nowhere near enough to cover the bill. It's a losing proposition either way, especially with Chinese models now in play.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- qwytw 2mo agoThere is. Specifically the pricing for open models from third party providers on OpenRouter since inference is a "commodity" at this point. Unless we think that Opus/GPT-5.6 are many times less efficient than GLM 5.2 or Kimi Openai and Anthropic are making money from inference. > it's nowhere near enough to cover the bill Obviously it does not cover R&D, marketing and other spending but nobody has ever claimed that here.
- vehemenz 2mo agoI see your point, but Anthropic and OpenAI are not only less efficient, they have much higher operating expenses because of their massive AWS/GCP spending (due to not owning it) and have more capital expenditures than everybody else. It's not comparable to third-party providers making some profit on the margin.