Live data from Hacker News

How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

nytimes.com

181–190 of 428 posts

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#181

Related https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/29/microsoft_earnings_q1... Microsoft seemingly just revealed that OpenAI lost $11.5B last quarter

It's incredible how Tesla used to lose a few hundred million a year and analysis shows would freak out claiming they'd never be profitable. Now Rivian can lose 5 billion a year and I don't hear anything about it, and OpenAI can lose 11 billion in a quarter and Microsoft still backs them. I do think this is going to be a deeply profitable industry, but this feels a little like the WeWork CEO flying couches to offices…

And did people listen to those "analyses" and dump Tesla, or its stock kept skyrocketing?

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#182

Related https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/29/microsoft_earnings_q1... Microsoft seemingly just revealed that OpenAI lost $11.5B last quarter

It's incredible how Tesla used to lose a few hundred million a year and analysis shows would freak out claiming they'd never be profitable. Now Rivian can lose 5 billion a year and I don't hear anything about it, and OpenAI can lose 11 billion in a quarter and Microsoft still backs them. I do think this is going to be a deeply profitable industry, but this feels a little like the WeWork CEO flying couches to offices…

It reminds me a lot of the late 1990s.

We had an impressive new technology (the Web), and everyone could see it was going to change the world, which fueled a huge gold rush that turned into a speculative bubble. And yes, ultimately the Web did change the world and a lot of people made a lot of money off of it. But that largely happened later, after the bubble burst, and in ways that people didn't quite anticipate. Many of the companies people were making big bets on at the time are now fertile fodder for YouTube video essays on spectacular corporate failures, and many of the ones that are dominant now were either non-existent or had very little mindshare back in the late '90s.

For example, the same year the .com bubble burst, Google was a small new startup that failed to sell their search engine to Excite, one of the major Web portal sites at the time. Excite turned them down because they thought $750,000 was too high a price. 2 years later, after the dust had started to settle, Excite was bankrupt and Google was Google.

And things today sure do strike me as being very similar to things 25, 30 years ago. We've got an exciting new technology, we've got lots of hype and exuberant investment, we've got one side saying we're in a speculative bubble, and the other side saying no this technology is the real deal. And neither side really wants to listen to the more sober voices pointing out that both these things have been true at the same time many times in the past, so maybe it's possible for them to both be true at the same time in the present, too. And, as always, the people who are most confident in their ability to predict the future ultimately prove to be no more clairvoyant than the rest of us.

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. As far as I can tell, OpenAI, Grok, etc sell me tokens at a loss. But I am having a hard time figuring out how to turn tokens into money (i.e. increased productivity). I can justify $40-$200 per developer per month on tokens but not more than that.

I'm not trying to be annoying, but surely if you'd justify spending $200/developer/month, you could afford $250/month... The reason I wonder about that is because that also seems to be the dynamic with all these deals and valuations. Surely if OpenAI would pay $30 billion on data centers, they could pay $40 billion, right? I'm not exactly sure where the price escalations actually top out.

No? That's a 25% expense increase. You just ate the margins on my product/service, and then some.

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#184
OpenAI is raising funding based on its own forecasts for AI demand growth, and sending most of it to Oracle, MSFT, Nvidia as well as paying insiders enormous salaries.

There are some interesting parallels here with the business model described in the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Developing countries take out huge loans from US lenders to build an electric grid, based on inflated forecasts from US consultancies they hired. The countries take on the debt, but the money mostly bypasses them and lands in the pockets of US engineering firms doing the construction, and government insiders taking kickbacks for greasing the wheels.

When the forecasted growth in industrial production fails to materialize, the countries are unable to repay the debt and have no option but to offer the US access to their resources, ports and votes in the UN.

What happens when OpenAI's forecasts of gargantuan growth fail to materialize and they're unable to sell more stock to pay off lenders? Does Uncle Sam step in with a bailout for "national security" reasons?

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s one key difference in my opinion: pre-.com deals were buying revenue with equity and nothing else. It was growth for growth’s sake. All that scale delivered mostly nothing. OpenAI applies the same strategy, but they’re using their equity to buy compute that is critical to improving their core technology. It’s circular, but more like a flywheel and less like a merry-go-round. I have some faith it could go anot…

Wasn’t there also a bunch of telecom infrastructure created in the dot-com bubble, tangible products created, etc? Things like servers, telephone wires, underwater internet cables, tech-storefronts, internet satellites, etc.

so much fiber was run that in the US over 90% of it wasn't even used

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are heading to an apocalyptic level of psychosis where human beings won't even believe the things they see with their own eyes are real anymore because of being flooded with AI slop 24/7/365.

We desperately need a technological solution to be able to somehow "sign" images and videos as being real and not generated or manipulated by AI. I have no idea how such a thing would work.

It won't work, because most people do not understand what a digital signature is and they will just say that has been faked as well.

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#188
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. As far as I can tell, OpenAI, Grok, etc sell me tokens at a loss. But I am having a hard time figuring out how to turn tokens into money (i.e. increased productivity). I can justify $40-$200 per developer per month on tokens but not more than that.

There’s about 5M software devs in the US so even at $1000/year/person spend, that’s only $5B of revenue to go around. Theres plenty of other uses cases but focusing on pure tech usage, it’s hard to see how the net present value of that equates to multiple trillions of dollars across the ecosystem.

It's the first new way of interacting with computers since the iPhone. It's going to be massively valuable and OpenAI is essentially guaranteed to be one of the players.

Re: How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

#189
>> figure out how to innovate on the financial model

Does it feel rather Orwellian that the original geeks now seem to be the same people who - forget about claiming technological innovation of as their own - completely discount it and apparently the important thing is now the creativity in funding an enterprise? We don't hear about the breakthroughs from the technologists, but the funding announcements from th investors and CEOs. It's not about the benefits of the technology, but how they're going to pay for it. Seems like a wildly perverse version of wag the dog...

Post reply on HN