Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#31

Post by nico »

fraywing wrote: post #2

What happens if OpenAI collapses at this point? Is it just too big to fail given defense contracts and Microsoft? The Sora sunsetting marked a big shift towards enterprise focus and meeting Anthropic on the enterprise battlefield, but almost all engineers I work with or know are using Claude at this point exclusively. Anyone seeing differently?

At work there’s only codex right now (no approval yet for anthropic - OpenAI access was easier/faster through Microsoft)

It was a pretty straightforward transition going from mostly using claude code, to now exclusively codex

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#32

Post by vwvcxv »

Avicebron wrote: post #22

I was convinced they were going to go the openclaw or something similar route..pivoting into cybersec/enterprise makes sense if they are trying to copy anthropic, but it doesn't really telegraph any sort of differentiator

its telegraphing that they have no vision

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#33

Post by thefounder »

impulser_ wrote: post #30

"You have ChatGPT, a 1 billion-user business growing 50-100% a year, what are you doing talking about enterprise and code?" The ironic part about this is GPT models are by far the worst models to chat too. I think I rather talk to a wall than GPT-5.4. It so unpleasant. I feel bad for anyone who only experience with AI is ChatGPT.

what makes gpt 5.4 bad to chat ? To me it seems smart and does the job albeit it’s a bit slow. I’m using it only/mostly with the “pro” /xhigh reasoning

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#34

Post by rvz »

So now they are realizing that they are indeed in a bubble and OpenAI was extremely overvalued?

Anthropic is also overvalued. Their revenue is not even recurring. It’s now “Annualised Revenue” due to token spend.

These two companies are just vehicles of a pump and dump scheme. OpenAI is already off loading shares with “acquisitions” that do not make any sense because investors already think they are about to IPO and not worth the price.

Also, one more thing… and it is called Deepseek.

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#35

Post by strongpigeon »

thefounder wrote: post #33
impulser_ wrote: post #30

"You have ChatGPT, a 1 billion-user business growing 50-100% a year, what are you doing talking about enterprise and code?" The ironic part about this is GPT models are by far the worst models to chat too. I think I rather talk to a wall than GPT-5.4. It so unpleasant. I feel bad for anyone who only experience with AI is ChatGPT.

what makes gpt 5.4 bad to chat ? To me it seems smart and does the job albeit it’s a bit slow. I’m using it only/mostly with the “pro” /xhigh reasoning

I think it’s the default system prompts of ChatGPT. I do think it’s better with the “Professional” tone with “Less Emoji” but that’s just me.

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#36

Post by blanched »

thefounder wrote: post #33
impulser_ wrote: post #30

"You have ChatGPT, a 1 billion-user business growing 50-100% a year, what are you doing talking about enterprise and code?" The ironic part about this is GPT models are by far the worst models to chat too. I think I rather talk to a wall than GPT-5.4. It so unpleasant. I feel bad for anyone who only experience with AI is ChatGPT.

what makes gpt 5.4 bad to chat ? To me it seems smart and does the job albeit it’s a bit slow. I’m using it only/mostly with the “pro” /xhigh reasoning

In my experience, within one reply ChatGPT (compared to Claude) tends to:

* generate a lot of text

* answer at least a few of what it thinks might be follow up questions

* restate its original answer a few times

* suggest a follow up “if you want, I can turn that into…”

It feels very tedious and noisy.

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#37

Post by thefounder »

fraywing wrote: post #2

What happens if OpenAI collapses at this point? Is it just too big to fail given defense contracts and Microsoft? The Sora sunsetting marked a big shift towards enterprise focus and meeting Anthropic on the enterprise battlefield, but almost all engineers I work with or know are using Claude at this point exclusively. Anyone seeing differently?

The world would barely notice if both OpenAI and Anthropic “fail”. There is a lot of competition in this space

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#38

Post by TheDong »

gradus_ad wrote: post #8

Claude Code is extremely easy to set up and use. I suspect its saturation among software professionals is at the majority of the addressable market. What if there are no other killer apps for Enterprise? Only CC will produce the level of token churn that could drive huge profits for model providers. The Enterprise market is not as substantial as the rapid success of CC makes seem.

What about "cowork", aiming to be the claude code of excel files and pdfs and screenshotting your desktop to tell you what's wrong?

Like, that feels like it's also a huge amount of token churn ("sure, I can search every xls file on your machine to find the 2023 invoice from that company"), and very early in its adaption curve.

Most people are still using AI as a webpage chatbot to ask questions to and copy+paste between, but running an "openclaw" like assistant, which can access your files, email, and opens you up to wild security attacks, that seems like a really big killer app.

Cowork to me also seems like it'll take longer to reach the broader market since the models are less good at "use the mouse and keyboard to do this repetitive task" than "write code", but I see it as having killer-app potential with lots of token churn.

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#39

Post by [deleted] »

strongpigeon wrote: post #35
thefounder wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what makes gpt 5.4 bad to chat ? To me it seems smart and does the job albeit it’s a bit slow. I’m using it only/mostly with the “pro” /xhigh reasoning

I think it’s the default system prompts of ChatGPT. I do think it’s better with the “Professional” tone with “Less Emoji” but that’s just me.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's $852B valuation faces investor scrutiny amid strategy shift, FT reports

#40

Post by groceryheist »

gradus_ad wrote: post #8

Claude Code is extremely easy to set up and use. I suspect its saturation among software professionals is at the majority of the addressable market. What if there are no other killer apps for Enterprise? Only CC will produce the level of token churn that could drive huge profits for model providers. The Enterprise market is not as substantial as the rapid success of CC makes seem.

Claude Code is rare product that is both beneficial and economically addictive, where its use increases demand for itself, at least in the supply / demand range for code we are accustomed to. It makes making software so much easier that Claude coding custom software becomes a solution to all sorts of past annoyances. Maintaining the software is easy enough thanks to Claude code.
Post reply on HN