OpenAI needs to raise at least $207B by 2030 so it can continue to lose money
237 points
1 hour ago
| 23 comments
| ft.com
| HN
matthewowen
1 hour ago
[-]
It's sort of hard to judge this.

The article mostly focuses on ChatGPT uses, but hard to say if ChatGPT is going to be the main revenue driver. It could be! Also unclear if the underlying report is underconsidering the other products.

It also estimates that LLM companies will capture 2% of the digital advertising market, which seems kind of low to me. There will be challenges in capturing it and challenges with user trust, but it seems super promising because it will likely be harder to block and has a lot of intent context that should make it like search advertising++. And for context, search advertising is 40% of digital ad revenue.

Seems like the error bars have to be pretty big on these estimates.

reply
this_user
23 minutes ago
[-]
IMO the key problem that OpenAI have is that they are all-in on AGI. Unlike a Google, they don't have anything else of any value. If AGI is not possible, or is at least not in reach within the next decade or so, OpenAI will have a product in the form of AI models that have basically zero moat. They will be Netscape in a world where Microsoft is giving away Internet Explorer for free.

Meanwhile, Google would be perfectly fine. They can just integrate whatever improvements the actually existing AI models offer into their other products.

reply
benterix
8 minutes ago
[-]
> They can just integrate whatever improvements the actually existing AI models offer into their other products.

If this is what users actually want.

reply
ActivePattern
2 minutes ago
[-]
Yes, as is implied by the word "improvements"
reply
tpurves
3 minutes ago
[-]
Thanks for calling this out. Here is a better comparison. Before Google was founded, the market for online search advertising was negligible. But the global market for all advertising media spend was on the order of 400B (NYT 1998). Today, Google's advertising revenue is around 260B / year or about 60% of the entire global advertising spend circa 1998.

If you think of openAI like a new google, as in a new category-defining primary channel for consumers to search and discover products. Well, 2% does seem pretty low.

reply
disgruntledphd2
57 minutes ago
[-]
> It also estimates that LLM companies will capture 2% of the digital advertising market, which seems kind of low to me. There will be challenges in capturing it and challenges with user trust, but it seems super promising because it will likely be harder to block and has a lot of intent context that should make it like search advertising++. And for context, search advertising is 40% of digital ad revenue.

Yeah, I don't like that estimate. It's either way too low, or much too high. Like, I've seen no sign of OpenAI building an ads team or product, which they'd need to do soon if it's going to contribute meaningful revenue by 2030.

reply
empiko
2 minutes ago
[-]
reply
_aavaa_
53 minutes ago
[-]
https://openai.com/careers/growth-paid-marketing-platform-en...

Is that role not exactly what you mention?

reply
xixixao
43 minutes ago
[-]
At least the description is not at all about building an adtech platform inside OpenAI, it's about optimizing their marketing spend (which being a big brand, makes sense).

There are a bunch of people from FB at OpenAI, so they could staff an adtech team internally I think, but I also think they might not be looking at ads yet, with having "higher" ambitions (at least not the typical ads machine ala FB/Google). Also if they really needed to monetize, I bet they could wire up Meta ads platform to buy on ChatGPT, saving themselves a decade of building a solid buying platform for marketers.

reply
disgruntledphd2
33 minutes ago
[-]
> There are a bunch of people from FB at OpenAI, so they could staff an adtech team internally I think

Well they have Fidji, so she could definitely recruit enough people to make it work.

> with having "higher" ambitions (at least not the typical ads machine ala FB/Google)

Everyone has higher ambitions till the bills come due. Instagram was once going to only have thoughtfully artisan brand content and now it's just DR (like every other place on the Internet).

> At least the description is not at all about building an adtech platform inside OpenAI, it's about optimizing their marketing spend (which being a big brand, makes sense).

The job description has both, suggesting that they're hedging their bets. They want someone to build attribution systems which is both wildly, wildly ambitious and not necessary unless they want to sell ads.

> I bet they could wire up Meta ads platform to buy on ChatGPT, saving themselves a decade of building a solid buying platform for marketers.

Wouldn't work. The Meta ads system is so tuned for feed based ranking that I suspect they wouldn't gain much from this approach.

reply
disgruntledphd2
49 minutes ago
[-]
Actually yes (I did mean to check again but I hadn't seen evidence of this before).

I do think that this seems odd, looks like they're hiring an IC to build some of this stuff, which seems odd as I would have expected them to be hiring multiple teams.

That being said, the earliest they could start making decent money from this is 2028, and if we don't see them hire a real sales team by next March then it's more likely to be 2030 or so.

reply
dotandgtfo
34 minutes ago
[-]
That's a marketing role, not a product role.
reply
postexitus
42 minutes ago
[-]
Tapping into AdTech is extremely hard, as it's hard driven by network effects. What you mean is "displaying ads inside OpenAI products" then, yes, achievable, but that's a miniscule part of targeted Ad markets - 2% is actually very optimistic. Otherwise, they can sell literally 0 products to existing players as they all have already established "AI" toolsets to help them for ad generation and targeting.
reply
friendzis
34 minutes ago
[-]
Query: LibraGPT, create a plan for my trip to Italia

Response: Book a car at <totally not an ad> and it will be waiting for you at arrival terminal, drive to Napoli and stay at <totally not an ad> with an amazing view. There's an amazing <totally not an ad> place that serves grandma's favorite carbonara! Do you want me to make the bookings with a totally not fake 20% discount?

reply
xiphias2
22 minutes ago
[-]
I'm traveling like this all the time already, I don't understand why it's hard for people to understand that ad placement is actually easier for chat than search
reply
poloniculmov
14 minutes ago
[-]
But who wants that? And you're going to say that's exactly what a travel agent does, selling me stuff so he can get a kickback. But when stuff goes wrong, I'll yell at the travel agent so he has some incentive to curate his ads.
reply
tantalor
16 minutes ago
[-]
How to speedrun massive penalties and disgorgement from FTC.

I guess we'll just put that in the "Cost of Goods Sold" bucket.

reply
lesuorac
18 minutes ago
[-]
That seems a bit risky for when the car isn't waiting for you at the terminal.

At least with an ad it's obvious a separate company is involved. If you do all the payment through OpenAI it seems to leave them open to liability.

reply
morkalork
5 minutes ago
[-]
Could be as simple as referral link commission like all those totally-not-content-farm travel blogs.

Travel sites, VPNs and insurance all pay quite handsomely (compared to say amazon links on cooking sites)

reply
echelon
27 minutes ago
[-]
If ChatGPT shows ads, I'll switch to Claude or Gemini or DeepSeek.
reply
HWR_14
13 minutes ago
[-]
Assuming you know it's an ad. Ads in answers will generate a ton of revenue and you'll never know if that Hilton really is the best hotel or if they just paid the most.
reply
wood_spirit
12 minutes ago
[-]
The OpenAI pitch for “publishing partnerships” (basically buying bias and placement) leaked last year.
reply
jcfrei
43 minutes ago
[-]
There's also a possible scenario where the online ads market around search engines gets completely disrupted and the only remaining avenues for ad spending are around content delivery systems (social media, youtube, streaming, webpages, etc.). All other discovery happens within chatbots and they just get a revenue share whenever a chatbot refers a user to a particular product. I think ChatGPT is soon going to roll out this feature where you can do walmart shopping without leaving the chat.
reply
recursive
22 minutes ago
[-]
Your revenue share concept sounds passive. I suspect advertisers will also be able to pay for placement.
reply
echelon
24 minutes ago
[-]
Shopping within Alexa never made sense. I'm not sure I'll want to do it via ChatGPT.

Maybe they're thinking they can build a universal store with search over every store? Like a "Google Shopping" type experience?

reply
rchaud
56 minutes ago
[-]
Google, Meta and Microsoft have AI search as well, so OAI with no ad product or real time bidding platform isn't going to just walk in and take their market.

2% is optimistic in my opinion.

reply
fhd2
45 minutes ago
[-]
Google, Meta and Microsoft would have to compete on demand, i.e. users of the chat product. Not saying they won't manage, but I don't think the competition is about ad tech infrastructure as much as it is about eyeballs.
reply
rchaud
25 minutes ago
[-]
It might take Microsoft's Bing share, but Google and Meta pioneered the application of slot machine variable-reward mechanics to Facebook, Instagram and Youtube, so it would take a lot more than competing on demand to challenge them.
reply
jack_pp
54 minutes ago
[-]
> And for context, search advertising is 40% of digital ad revenue.

But all the search companies have their own AI so how would OAI make money in this sector?

reply
agwp
15 minutes ago
[-]
Several ways, although I'm not sure whether the below will happen:

1. Paid ads - ChatGPT could offer paid listings at the top of its answers, just like Google does when it provides a results page. Not all people will necessarily leave Google/Gemini for future search queries, but some of the money that used to go to Google/Bing could now go to OpenAI.

2. Behavioral targeting based on past ChatGPT queries. If you have been asking about headache remedies, you might see ads for painkillers - both within ChatGPT and as display ads across the web.

3. Affiliate / commission revenue - if you've asked for product recommendations, at least some might be affiliate links.

The revenue from the above likely wouldn't cover all costs based on their current expenditure. But it would help a bit - particularly for monetizing free users.

Plus, I'm sure there will be new advertising models that emerge in time. If an advertiser could say "I can offer $30 per new customer" and let AI figure out how to get them and send a bill, that's very different to someone setting up an ad campaign - which involves everything from audience selection and creative, to bid management and conversion rate optimization.

reply
aurareturn
54 minutes ago
[-]

  The team also assumes LLM companies will capture 2 per cent of the digital advertising market in revenue, from slightly more than zero currently.
This seems quite low. Meta has 3.5 billion users and projected ~$200b revenue in 2025. ChatGPT is at ~1 billion so far. By 2030, let's just stay ChatGPT reaches 2 billion years or 57% of Meta's current users. I'd like to think that OpenAI's digital ad revenue should reach 10% by 2030 an then accelerate from there. In my opinion, the data that ChatGPT has on a user is better than the inferred user data from Instagram/FB usage. I think ChatGPT can build a better advertisement profile of each user than Meta can which can lead to better ad targeting. Further more, I think ChatGPT can really create a novel advertisement platform such as learning about sponsored products directly via chat. I'm already asking ChatGPT about potential products and services everyday like medicine, travel, gadgets, etc.

I think people are severely underestimating ChatGPT as a way to make money other than subscriptions. I also think people are underestimating the branding power ChatGPT has already. All my friends have ChatGPT on their phone. None of them except me has Gemini or Claude app.

This doesn't account for OpenAI's other ambitions such as Sora app.

Hey Sam Altman or OpenAI employee, if you are reading this, I think you should buy the North American version of TikTok if the opportunity presents itself. The future of short videos will be heavily AI generated/assisted. Combine Tiktok's audience with your Sora tools and ChatGPT data and you got yourself a true Instagram competitor immediately. If the $14b sales price of US Tiktok is real, that's an absolute bargain in the grand scheme of things.

reply
mbesto
3 minutes ago
[-]
> Meta has 3.5 billion users and projected ~$200b revenue in 2025

Meta makes about $200B on ads, Google makes about $235B on ads. Advertising is roughly 1.5% of the total GDP of the US and hasn't changed in 20+ years. So what you have is a big ass pie with a few players fighting for it that barely grows every year.

OpenAI has to somehow:

1. Compete directly with Google Gemini and Meta's Llama for a piece of users pie with a product that has very little differentiator (functionality and technically speaking).

2. Have to prove to advertisers that their single dollar ad purchase on OpenAI is categorically worth more than any other channel.

3. Have enough forward capital to continue purchasing capital-intense hardware purchases.

4. Having enough capital to weather any potential economic headwinds.

I know where my bet is.

reply
gtirloni
49 minutes ago
[-]
> Meta has 3.5 billion users and projected ~$200b revenue in 2025.

Meta has WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook to account for that.

OpenAI has ChatGPT (not a social platform).

It seems to me you're comparing apples and oranges here.

reply
aurareturn
45 minutes ago
[-]

  OpenAI has ChatGPT (not a social platform).
You didn't state reasons why not being a social platform matters here.

Anyways, check this out: https://openai.com/index/group-chats-in-chatgpt/

  It seems to me you're comparing apples and oranges here.
I don't think so. 1 billion users and a clear intention to deliver ads with an immense amount of data on users. That's a clear threat to both Meta and Google.

PS. That's why Meta and Google are all in on AI. OpenAI is an existential threat to both in my humble opinion.

reply
ncallaway
23 minutes ago
[-]
> You didn't state reasons why not being a social platform matters here.

The network effects matter so much more for a social platform than a chat bot. The switching costs for a user are much lower, so users can move to a different one much easier.

How sticky will chat bots prove to be in the long term? Will OpenAI be able to maintain a lead in the space in the long term, the way Google was over Bing? It's possible, but it's also pretty easy to imagine other providers being competitive and a landscape where users move between different LLMs more fluidly

reply
k_kelly
46 minutes ago
[-]
Google makes over a billion of its ad Revenue from search. Intent works.

But I think Open AI is not a slam dunk for Ads. Gemini and AI mode will compete for the same budget, and Google's Ad machine is polished.

I think eventually you will buy Ads for Open AI in Google's marketing platforms, just like most people buy bing ads in Google.

reply
aurareturn
42 minutes ago
[-]
OpenAI knows my intent better than Google.

I'm telling it nearly everything from my work problems to health problems to love life problems to product research, traveling plans, etc.

reply
jayd16
8 seconds ago
[-]
Google and Meta know your intent without you even telling them...
reply
l2silver
50 minutes ago
[-]
I wonder if meta is a poor comparison for advertising because they're users tend to spend more time on their products doom scrolling, as opposed to something like google, where you get your answer right away and move on.
reply
aurareturn
37 minutes ago
[-]
ChatGPT is a hybrid between Google and Meta. People use it for product and service search and research. People also use it as a companion - especially young people.

It's becoming social as well: https://openai.com/index/group-chats-in-chatgpt/

reply
arionmiles
15 minutes ago
[-]
>I think you should buy the North American version of TikTok if the opportunity presents itself. The future of short videos will be heavily AI generated/assisted.

I will have whatever you're smoking. If a social media platform literally proves the dead internet theory, it's not making any money.

reply
csomar
10 minutes ago
[-]
I actually believe we are speed running into this. I have seen way too many people watching AI generated videos and scrolling through them.
reply
mise_en_place
2 minutes ago
[-]
The reason for this is that leverage is extremely expensive and punished in the current macro regime. OpenAI will lose money faster if they scale up. That's because the Fed can capitulate all it wants, but real interest rates and real yields won't move. The market is saying "pay me".
reply
Aeroi
2 minutes ago
[-]
Google earned $264.59 billion in ad revenue in 2024 alone. OpenAI can figure it out.
reply
rpmisms
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
raincole
21 minutes ago
[-]
ChatGPT just launched "shopping research."[0]

Hideous idea as it is, I fully expect they break even in 2026.

[0]: https://openai.com/index/chatgpt-shopping-research/

reply
542458
7 minutes ago
[-]
Honestly, this is huge for people like me who tend to over-research and over-think the hell out of product choices. "Find me a top-fill warm-mist humidifier that looks nice, is competitively priced against similar products, and is available from a retailer in $city_name. Now watch for it to go on sale and lmk."

If they can figure out how to get the right kickbacks/referrals without compromising user trust and really nail the search and aggregation of data this could be a real money-maker.

reply
adidoit
17 minutes ago
[-]
LLMs have high utility for coding. The PMF is so strong that even with just coding i feel they will see an ARPU expansion beyond conservative assumptions.

There are adjacancies in white collar work like financial analysis that they will go after. All these will capture high ARPU usage.

Consumer is not their only path to revenue but it is probably the easiest to model. The enterprise play to automate and accelerate some white collar workers is a clear target not reflected here.

reply
zerosizedweasle
16 minutes ago
[-]
They've committed to spend an amount equal to the entire US defense budget just in October.
reply
skizm
5 minutes ago
[-]
I think you mean the US WAR budget! /s
reply
ChicagoDave
36 minutes ago
[-]
TechCrunch: Anthropic is projecting positive cash flow by 2028, while OpenAI is expecting sizable losses, with cash burn reaching $14 billion in 2026
reply
ZiiS
52 minutes ago
[-]
Raising $207B is plausible vs the dozens of Nuclear Power plants they also need.
reply
yehat
15 minutes ago
[-]
No, they can use the ideas from The Matrix for power delivery.
reply
Lalabadie
19 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, that's the "so it can continue to lose money" part.
reply
ripped_britches
52 minutes ago
[-]
I heard this about Amazon for 20 years
reply
mandevil
17 minutes ago
[-]
You misunderstand the Amazon story. Amazon did two pre-IPO funding rounds: <1m angel round and an 8m Series A led by Kleiner Perkins. That's it. In contrast, OAI has raised almost 60 billion in 10 funding rounds, and if you RtFA you can see the estimates are they have to raise hundreds of billions more.

For the IPO itself Amazon sold 3 million shares at $18, for a raise of 54m (from the IPO alone they had enough cash to pay off every investor up to that point). In July 2001, in the heart of the dotcom crash, they raised 100m by selling equity to undisclosed investors, and of course they have been using shares as part of their compensation packages for a very long time, but that's about it for Amazon's entire equity.

They did raise 15b in a bond issuance a few weeks ago, their first bonds issued since 2022, with the money going to several things but mostly AI. However, since bond payoffs are very different from selling equity this is a very different play from what OAI is doing. Amazon will never pay more than a fixed amount for that money, capped upside.

The reason this is different is that Amazon has largely run either a small profit or a small loss, quarter after quarter, because they take their profits and put it into building datacenters and warehouses and software and the like. But because of that cash generation they have only rarely tapped outside investors, either in bonds or equity markets. OAI is not generating near enough cash to fund their operations, so they have been selling equity in absolutely enormous quantities- they have already raised more cash pre-IPO than any company in history and outside estimates like this one from HSBC call for them to blow past the amount they've already raised. This is fundamentally very very different.

reply
nasmorn
46 minutes ago
[-]
Amazon raised like 10million. People complained about lack of dividends but that was at least money earned
reply
Rebuff5007
25 minutes ago
[-]
Amazon had a product on day 1... particularly one that was unique and made a lot of sense for the moment it was introduced.
reply
jandrese
9 minutes ago
[-]
Selling books online was certainly profitable, but I'm not sure about unique. Amazon's big success is that they had no particular ties to any existing publisher so they didn't have the corporate headwinds of "this will kill our brick and mortar stores and their distribution systems!".
reply
reducesuffering
17 minutes ago
[-]
People still said this about Uber as of last year, few realizing that they're generating $10B in profit a year now
reply
zerosizedweasle
36 minutes ago
[-]
Amazon wasn't committing to larger spending in one year than the US defense budget.
reply
silveraxe93
30 minutes ago
[-]
2025 US defense budget is $849.8 billion[1].

Had a look and:

>In total, OpenAI aims to invest approximately $1.4 trillion in computing infrastructure – encompassing Google Cloud, Nvidia chips, and data center expansions.

Huh yeah fair. That's more than the yearly defense budget. Absurd. Though I'm sure it's not _yearly_

- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_...

reply
bpt3
25 minutes ago
[-]
To add to the valid counterpoints in the existing replies, Amazon was cash flow positive for most of those 20 years, so they were investing their own money back into things that could generate even more revenue (and profit!) for the company.

OpenAI is still losing money much faster than it can make it and is planning to accelerate those losses indefinitely.

I think the most likely outcome is that it turns into something like Uber, where they continue to lose money waiting for a major technological leap (truly unassisted and reliable AI in this case, fully self-driving cars in the case of Uber) and then pivot a bit to a largely unnecessary and poorly executed business model that people reluctantly use for the most part (with some eager advocates) but makes some money.

reply
darkwizard42
57 minutes ago
[-]
Is there any link directly to the report? I am unable to find any in this article or a number of others which seem to just copy the same information here.

I think beyond the number of crazy assumptions (no Google taking market share in the consumer market?? only 2% of digital advertising expected to be captured by OpenAI?) it is hard to nail down which levers could move which might make this funding hole disappear.

reply
voxadam
1 hour ago
[-]
Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46054092 | 11 hours ago | 44 points | 19 comments
reply
tehjoker
16 minutes ago
[-]
You already can't trust llm output. How will you trust it when its actively steering you based on profit motive?
reply
pjmlp
31 minutes ago
[-]
What about the usual capitalism point of view?

If their business isn't sustainable they should go bankrupt, and close shop.

reply
dgb23
1 minute ago
[-]
Boom and bust hype cycles have always been a feature of capitalism, especially for advanced technology. Perhaps the only way to know the limit is to overshoot.
reply
rchaud
14 minutes ago
[-]
Capitalism makes more sense if it's thought about purely in terms of individual self interest as supposed to something that leads to an efficient market on aggregate.

The CEOs making big calls across the economy have already negotiated golden parachutes in the event of their failure.

The financiers and lawyers getting a chunk of each bond deal they close have every incentive to raise more than what's actually needed. Investment funds flush with ZIRP dollars have every incentive to plow it back into investments to show that "the money is at work".

reply
Joel_Mckay
20 minutes ago
[-]
Except the 7 firms make up >30% of all market growth, and move more capital than entire countries. Yes, they are hemorrhaging cash with every new customer, and burdening taxpayers by eating community electrical and water infrastructure.

In terms of business, it is not sustainable:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-8TDOFqkQA

The hype-cycle is nothing new =3

"Memoirs of extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds" (Charles Mackay, 1852)

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/24518/24518-h/24518-h.htm

reply
tantalor
39 minutes ago
[-]
> as ubiquitous and useful as Microsoft 365

What is this saying? Is this sarcastic?

I don't know anybody with a Microsoft 365 subscription.

I suppose the cloud storage is nice, but you can do much better; Google gives you double that for the same price ($99/yr).

reply
zerosizedweasle
37 minutes ago
[-]
Businesses, a lot of people have it through work.
reply
rapsey
1 hour ago
[-]
The most interesting point about OpenAI I have heard lately is they are literally trying to make themselves too big to fail. If they go down so does everyone else, which explains all those strange deals with everybody and the comment from their (cfo?) about being backstopped by the gov.
reply
akira_067
58 minutes ago
[-]
This seems accurate, and plausibly the only way out. The biggest issue I see here is that in this case... the greed might topple a government
reply
rvnx
1 hour ago
[-]
If OpenAI fails, they could potentially bring in their downfall the major cloud providers who invested in hardware for them, expecting that it would pay-off over time.
reply
lkey
45 minutes ago
[-]
Only Oracle went into debt to fund this expansion, and may well die. The rest of the cloud oriented mag7 used cash, can afford to write it off, and will continue being monopolies unimpeded.
reply
maherbeg
33 minutes ago
[-]
I don't see a world where there is such a catastrophic failure, unless someone comes up with a significantly more efficient architecture.

We're barely scratching the surface of the utility of LLMs with today's models. They aren't more pervasive because of their costs today, but what happens if they drop another order of magnitude with the current capabilities?

reply
ZiiS
56 minutes ago
[-]
'Potentially' but we are nowhere close to this. Hyperscalers print a _lot_ of money they can afford to lose. Even Nvidia wouldn't be in too much trouble yet. (The pure LLM companies are already toast, IMHO).
reply
franktankbank
51 minutes ago
[-]
Oh no not the Cloud!
reply
Rebuff5007
21 minutes ago
[-]
Hot take: a flagship silicon valley startup built on hype and overzealous ambition crashing and burning in 2026 is exactly what the industry needs right now.
reply
YetAnotherNick
1 hour ago
[-]
> If they go down so does everyone else

What does that even mean?

reply
MattDamonSpace
55 minutes ago
[-]
Similar to certain banks in 2007/2008, the idea would be “so much investment is tied to one company that if that company went bankrupt, it could have consequences for the broader economy”
reply
rcarr
34 minutes ago
[-]
The thing is, it is not 2007/2008 any more. The US government is holding record amounts of debt and countries around the world are now trying to become independent of it. This includes its bond markets on which the dollar relies upon to give it its reserve currency status, which in turn is what gives it its power to print money and bail industries out. If something happens that requires Big Tech to be bailed out and international bond holders decide the US is no longer reliable, it could very well end up triggering the collapse of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency and the downfall of the US as we know it.
reply
rvnx
58 minutes ago
[-]
Let's say OpenAI signed a commitment contract that they agreed to spend XXX USD in your company over N years. You invest in infrastructure, your contractors sometimes take loans, the construction companies take loans. Countries / Funds lend money to such companies (example: Saudi Arabia fund), these funds themselves raised debt, it can quickly spiral down.
reply
bradfa
54 minutes ago
[-]
If OpenAI fails, wouldn't their customers just move to other AI providers? So the total hardware demand by AI companies wouldn't dramatically change over a reasonable time frame?
reply
stuartjohnson12
47 minutes ago
[-]
If OpenAI fails, the assumed case is overcapitalisation relative to demand. In such a world, if the reason OpenAI has no liquidity is because there's insufficient demand, there's no customers to move across.
reply
tushar-r
45 minutes ago
[-]
What happens if the OpenAI failure is because of lack of demand from their customers and the market in general? None of the AI providers or hardware providers will survive, no?
reply
jvanderbot
58 minutes ago
[-]
Is it unclear? Compared to other times a "too big to fail" industry failed?

If OpenAI crashes, for example funding stops, they go broke, fall behind, nobody buys anything, then all the money they invested for data centers or demand they created for NVIDIA chips and compute collapses. That creates surplus of hardware, causes lots of construction/buildout / stockup orders to get cancelled, and the whole thing ripples as suppliers and construction and data center providers etc etc suddenly lose a ton of anticipated profits.

Share prices drop as people dump to protect their portfolios, anticipating dips in the prices because share prices will drop as people dump to protect their portfolios (I'm not kidding).

Given that the big 7 AI companies are basically _all_ of the market growth lately, it doesn't even take a serious panic / paranoia episode to see the market itself stagnate or significantly regress, as people pull from anything AI related, and then pull from the market itself anticipating the market will fall.

It's a fairly standard playbook at this point.

reply
rapsey
1 hour ago
[-]
In terms of the stock market since without AI thw US would be in a recession.
reply
bill3389
39 minutes ago
[-]
It is not losing money, the whole industry haven't figured out how to generate revenue yet. it is the starting phase of LLM like we experienced in .com bubble. Is it a bubble at this point? Yes. Can it generate revenue in the future? Yes. Will openAI survive in this bubble? Maybe.
reply
Rebuff5007
24 minutes ago
[-]
You seem to be complicating your thinking here.

They are spending more money than they are bringing in. This means they are losing money.

reply
SalmoShalazar
27 minutes ago
[-]
It is quite literally losing money at an unsustainable rate. They need a path to profitability otherwise this is a massive boondoggle for all of the investors
reply
bill3389
16 minutes ago
[-]
we are still at early age. think it as human, the early age is burning money. when grow older, the ability of making money increases.

Compared with .com bubble. most .com dies, and the one who survived are GOOGLE, AMAZON, Tencent etc.

reply
Mistletoe
17 minutes ago
[-]
Unfortunately “all of the investors” is in reality the whole world’s markets due to the disgusting top heavy nature of the SP500 currently.

I have been talking to AI a lot about what portfolios will survive that crash. :)

reply
integricho
12 minutes ago
[-]
And what is the conclusion, what will survive?
reply
mcbuilder
25 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, financial bubble != useless technology. Maybe coding agents do cost $50 per month in the long term, but I might just pay that for entertainment and personal stuff. Like, I don't even try to vibe code my job, but in the evenings having a cool slop generator is good times.

Right now I use a Chinese vibe code plan, really good value.

reply
Invictus0
1 hour ago
[-]
People crying about the revenue gap constantly forget that OpenAI still hasn't turned on the ads, porn, and gambling. Trust, they will turn it on eventually.
reply
sethops1
58 minutes ago
[-]
Try using the shopping feature they just launched. It's literally just jamming ads into your chat session.

https://openai.com/index/chatgpt-shopping-research/

reply
testfrequency
55 minutes ago
[-]
This is what they hired Fidji for, and they are going down the same dark path she took Meta down.

Everything’s for sale, and they will amplify whatever == revenue.

reply
jazzyjackson
39 minutes ago
[-]
Which is silly because the whole point of asking an AI what induction stovetop to buy is so I don't have to do "shopping research"
reply
femiagbabiaka
1 hour ago
[-]
HSBC, the firm who did the analysis in the article, took into account projected revenues matching user numbers of 44% of the world's non-Chinese population.
reply
yabatopia
59 minutes ago
[-]
With zero market share for Google.

Living in AImaginationland must be nice. C’mon kids, let’s all sing the AImagination song: AImagination, AImagination, AIiiimagination, …

reply
femiagbabiaka
49 minutes ago
[-]
44% for OpenAI wouldn't mean 0% for Google, but considering that even Apple only has about 30% of the global smartphone marketshare, OpenAI getting there seems unlikely.
reply
rvnx
1 hour ago
[-]
It would be plausible but very optimistic projection if there was no competition that is currently crushing OpenAI
reply
femiagbabiaka
57 minutes ago
[-]
Oh, I agree it's implausible. But GP said

> People crying about the revenue gap constantly forget that OpenAI still hasn't turned on the ads, porn, and gambling

But quite the opposite, HSBC assumed that they will have a virtual global monopoly on AI, and even under those projections they will still need to take on hundreds of billions of debt. I'm sure if they get there getting access to that debt will be easier than I'm assuming currently.

reply
rvnx
55 minutes ago
[-]
Do you believe so ? (like real question, not sarcastic here)
reply
femiagbabiaka
51 minutes ago
[-]
I think that a company with a global monopoly on a thinking machine that replaces wide swaths of current internet business categories, whose user base makes up most of the world outside of the GFW, would be very valuable on the public market and would probably have access to as much debt as they want, even if it had negative consequences for the world economy. Even the 2nd or 3rd place company in that race will be quite profitable. It's not impossible, just implausible.
reply
snowwrestler
31 minutes ago
[-]
Ok, probably true, but it’s still a pretty far fall from “we’re just about to deliver AGI which will put us in the driver seat of the entire global economy.” Which was the core value prop of their $trillion investment pitch. Like, there are way cheaper ways to deliver ads, porn, and gambling than training and operating huge LLMs.
reply
akira_067
56 minutes ago
[-]
They may not be shipping good enough products, but on the flip side it still feels like they have almost no competition outside of coding and image gen. The EOL termination of 4-o should be some evidence of this.
reply
bildung
19 minutes ago
[-]
OTOH, why don't they ship good enough products? To me all of OpenAIs recent investments strongly suggest they hit a dead end with their current LLM approach. After all, if they knew the path ahead for GPT looks great, why don't they invest into training the next big thing instead of doing datacenters with the intention of renting them out?
reply
an0malous
26 minutes ago
[-]
The cost per generation is still too expensive, they would not profit from ads and very few people pay for porn. I don't see how they'd profit from gambling either.
reply
1970-01-01
46 minutes ago
[-]
I think you're right, however that only defeats themselves in the long run. AI is something that can be run locally, while search, shopping, movies, social, etc. cannot. And once the ads are baked into the product, you will need a force like the EU to remove them else shareholders will riot. Ads will be the perfect weapon to shoot themselves in the foot.
reply
ecshafer
1 hour ago
[-]
I think the ads will be turned on, inevitably.

I hope the porn and gambling aren't turned on, but they will be. Probably under spin off companies to shield the brand, but using the tech.

reply
sethops1
57 minutes ago
[-]
I am suspect that ads will be able to cover the cost of inference, much less model building, salaries, product development, etc. The ad industry is built upon _and priced for_ websites that return results for virtually zero cost. That isn't going to be true for rendering AI.
reply
looknee
58 minutes ago
[-]
They're already turning on the porn: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpd2qv58yl5o
reply
pksebben
59 minutes ago
[-]
if I had my druthers, we'd leave the ads but get the porn and gambling.

two out of three of those require me to want to do them for them to affect my life.

reply
moi2388
53 minutes ago
[-]
You are more attracted to ads than porn?!
reply
ecshafer
23 minutes ago
[-]
Define "attracted". I believe porn and gambling both do incredible amounts of damage to society. Ads probably do some damage to society, though I can recognize some benefits in being able to advertise and market products and services. I don't believe there is any benefit to the other two.
reply
rchaud
46 minutes ago
[-]
Why would OpenAI have any sort of advantage in these industries compared to the established players?

it's pretty sobering to think that the so-called harbingers of SkyNet AGI have to fall back to mafia-era revenue streams like vice to convince shareholders that their money wasn't wasted.

reply
fullshark
46 minutes ago
[-]
Ads/porn I get but how does genAI powered gambling work?
reply
bigfishrunning
6 minutes ago
[-]
"ChatGPT, here's 5 dollars. Please roll a fair die. did i win?"

This is truly the most stupid timeline.

reply
9cb14c1ec0
1 hour ago
[-]
I fully expect all three to happen.
reply
otabdeveloper4
1 hour ago
[-]
> ads, porn, and gambling

We already have those at home without OpenAI.

Also, the competition would be ruthless.

reply
moralestapia
1 hour ago
[-]
Sure, because there's one single ad network, one single place where you can gamble and one single porn site in the entire planet ...
reply
rchaud
41 minutes ago
[-]
This is absolutely what techbro MBAs raised on case studies of Apple and Toyota are likely to think. Gamblers and porn users do not have any sort of brand loyalty and are likely to be hostile to the idea of "vertical integration" and "360 degree views of the customer".
reply
Spivak
54 minutes ago
[-]
That is exactly the parent's point, that while those things could bring in revenue, the competition in those industries is already incredibly fierce. And that's before potential new entrants into the space on the AI front. Even in the best of cases I don't think anyone is gonna be able to pull anything other than middling margins.
reply
thm
1 hour ago
[-]
"Google is excluded entirely"
reply
sebow
57 minutes ago
[-]
(Imo) They will turn to all of these(especially to porn and gambling) when the core model of "enhance your life" will slowly fade away. The "academia space", the teens/boomers demographics, all of those will stop using OpenAI at scale if they're bombarded with vices (porn, gambling, etc).

Ads & referrals are already in the works, and people are generally tolerant of those. But, as with any company, appearances matter. ChatGPT will definitely lose users at the slightest possibility of having non-sanitized content served to more morally sensible groups.

reply
Invictus0
52 minutes ago
[-]
there will be differentiated cohorts
reply
lm28469
1 hour ago
[-]
Wouldn't that entirely kill the AGI delulu narrative (for people who still believe in it)
reply
michaelcampbell
55 minutes ago
[-]
Delusion isn't swayed by facts. There are more than enough examples of this in the world today.
reply
paxys
23 minutes ago
[-]
TL;DR - financial analysts look at current charts and project them foward by 5 years and go "wow the numbers look bad".

Sure OpenAI may well be bleeding money into the 2030s, or may even go bust completely depending on how pessimistic you are, but the analysis completely skips:

- They are building their own data centers, and will be less reliant on renting compute from Microsoft and Amazon over time.

- Once the AI bubble has subsided costs for GPU purchases and rentals will decrease significantly. Plus there will be more advancements and competition in the space (e.g. Google TPUs) and Nvidia will no longer be able to name their own price.

- We will write more efficient software for training and inference.

- Once user growth is tapped out OpenAI will no longer need to have the overly generous free tier that they do today. And if they decide to turn up the advertising faucet these users could bring in a ton more revenue than in the projection. Thinking that every AI company combined will capture only 2% of the total digital advertising market is ridiculous. AI apps are already challenging social media for scrolling time.

Basically, the entire space is evolving so rapidly that it's pointless to make a projection with the assumption that the landscape isn't going to change from here on.

reply
aika_london
51 minutes ago
[-]
How to read FT for free
reply
mikestew
47 minutes ago
[-]
reply
fullshark
1 hour ago
[-]
"If you owe the cloud computing company a hundred dollars, it's your problem, but if you owe the cloud computing company 207 billion dollars..."
reply
akira_067
59 minutes ago
[-]
Too big to fail. It's essentially 08 part 2 with the expected irr.
reply
rubyfan
33 minutes ago
[-]
OpenAI deals will likely end up with government backing in the next 12 months. Then we’ll all be on the hook for it.
reply
ieie3366
33 minutes ago
[-]
But this is not a bank, or an airline, or a real estate giant.

If OpenAI goes bankrupt, what happens? People won’t be able to write their precious slop oh no and serious professionals will just switch to any other LLM provider

reply
dude250711
1 hour ago
[-]
A bit like a socialist country.
reply
achierius
32 minutes ago
[-]
Nope, workers don't own the means of production -- this is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, baby.
reply
h1fra
56 minutes ago
[-]
But it's happening in the biggest capitalist country in a capitalist world
reply
lawn
1 hour ago
[-]
Not at all. This is capitalism.
reply
dist-epoch
1 hour ago
[-]
No, this is Sparta
reply
brap
51 minutes ago
[-]
Bailouts are not capitalism
reply
peppersghost93
44 minutes ago
[-]
They are if they happen under capitalist states, which is what the US is.
reply
rchaud
34 minutes ago
[-]
So if something is declared "capitalist", it maintains that state in perpetuity, regardless of the actions it takes in reality?
reply
rightbyte
39 minutes ago
[-]
Queues are not socialism?
reply
loudmax
53 minutes ago
[-]
In unconstrained socialism, a small group of powerful individuals use government control of corporations for their personal benefit.

In unconstrained capitalism, a small group of powerful individuals use corporate control of government for their personal benefit.

Clearly, these outcomes are completely different.

reply
GuinansEyebrows
38 minutes ago
[-]
"unconstrained socialism" is kind of an oxymoron, isn't it?
reply
akira_067
58 minutes ago
[-]
Something something true capitalism has never been tried before
reply
kennywinker
58 minutes ago
[-]
Exactly - private profits, public losses, is quintessential neoliberal capitalism.
reply
stuffn
59 minutes ago
[-]
Not when the government steps in because OpenAI, NVIDIA, Microsoft, etc are all going down together. There is so much pseudo-money-laundering going on between those companies. I would be shocked if the government (e.g. 2008 style socialism for the rich) steps in to make them “too big to fail”.
reply
OccamsMirror
43 minutes ago
[-]
Microsoft and Nvidia aren't going down.

Their stock prices might go down but they're not going down.

reply
rchaud
31 minutes ago
[-]
Stock prices going down is the reason AIG, GM and Chrysler received bailouts.
reply
stanleykm
58 minutes ago
[-]
still capitalism
reply
user3939382
1 hour ago
[-]
If they want to come talk to me I can help them out of this. Usually the smart guys are too busy talking to hear an offer though.
reply