AI exits in America probably have a political cliff approaching fast as populist backlash will hit them, or perhaps they see political winds favorable to regulatory capture in the future and are waiting for that?
OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
31–40 of 159 posts
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#32Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way is SpaceX's volatility an obvious cause? It would be one thing if SpaceX was down from its IPO price, but it's not, it's just down from a post-IPO peak. To me this has all the hallmarks of a backfilled rationalization. > OpenAI’s advisers presented company executives with the option of waiting until 2027 to go public with a $1 trillion valuation, or lower the targeted valuation for a quicker I.P.O. Mr. Al…
> In what way is SpaceX's volatility an obvious cause? Let me amend: it's a more-obvious cause given it's pertinent new information in a way Zitron partially leaking financials many institutional investors have already seen is not. > don't know how to read this and reach any conclusion other than, OpenAI leadership won't accept what financial analysts consider to be a rational valuation of its stock Neither did Space…
Perhaps we're really on the same page. I don't think OpenAI executives read the Zitron article and said "oh my god now we can't IPO!"; I think they're both downstream of the underlying bad financials, which SpaceX only managed to mitigate due to the Elon Musk personality trade. (And I agree that this theory falsifiably predicts Anthropic will also find a reason to delay.)
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> window has basically closed for them for the time being. The business math just isn’t there Unless Anthropic also cancels its IPO, this probably isn't it.
The math doesn’t help Anthropic either but the market views these two companies very differently at the moment. Anthropic is seen as having momentum. Open AI is seen as having likely peaked. That makes a huge difference when pitching an IPO.
Agree but Anthropic momentum is fading too.
Open source is starting to slowly become a source of frustration for frontier labs In the discussion around value for money.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
> window has basically closed for them for the time being. The business math just isn’t there Unless Anthropic also cancels its IPO, this probably isn't it.
The math doesn’t help Anthropic either but the market views these two companies very differently at the moment. Anthropic is seen as having momentum. Open AI is seen as having likely peaked. That makes a huge difference when pitching an IPO.
> but the market views these two companies very differently at the moment. Anthropic is seen as having momentum. Open AI is seen as having likely peaked
What are you basing this on? Both are currently doing rounds/tenders that are placing without problems.
The media treats these two differently, as do financial influencers. But I'd be careful about conflating either of them with the market.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#36> The A.I. company’s advisers are pushing its chief executive, Sam Altman, to move slowly after SpaceX’s stock has been volatile and as the start-up grapples with financial challenges. Surely if your company isn't just blowing smoke then you have nothing to worry about. Or is this an admission that the insane valuation for these companies is currently just bullshit?
> if your company isn't just blowing smoke then you have nothing to worry about Not really. Plenty of solid companies have to wring their hands around IPO timing based on market conditions. Sometimes, this is due to valuation multiples. Sometimes it's due to fads, e.g. investors preferring capital-structure efficiency versus low leverage.
I mean, my comment wasn't necessarily meant to be some insightful analysis. But I do find it weird that OpenAI has seemingly gone from racing Anthropic to "maybe in 6 months" in the span of a week.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#37[flagged]
... you think this is vindicating Ed Zitron? The dude is on a spree claiming the bubble will burst any time soon [1]. In fact Ed Zitron predicted that OpenAI will IPO sooner and not later [2]! This whole post is yet again another thing that he got wrong. [1] https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ed+zitron+bubbl... [2] https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-cfo-news > It's clear that both OpenAI and Anthropic are r…
OpenAI did confidentially file their S-1, which costs a ton of money to put together for the bankers and regulators to review. They did test the market and it looks like either the banks or people directly around Altman told him not to move forward. That doesn't mean Zitron was wrong about OpenAI IPOing. They took steps in that direction and then decided not to move forward. That's not his fault.
As far as the bubble bursting soon, we are starting to see some pretty concerning signals. The South Korean stock market triggered trading circuit breakers twice earlier this week to stop a runaway selloff in the tech sector. For reference, circuit breakers have only been triggered in the Korean market 10 times in history, and only 5 times ever in the US markets.
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/world-indices/articles/kos...
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In what way is SpaceX's volatility an obvious cause? Let me amend: it's a more-obvious cause given it's pertinent new information in a way Zitron partially leaking financials many institutional investors have already seen is not. > don't know how to read this and reach any conclusion other than, OpenAI leadership won't accept what financial analysts consider to be a rational valuation of its stock Neither did Space…
Perhaps we're really on the same page. I don't think OpenAI executives read the Zitron article and said "oh my god now we can't IPO!"; I think they're both downstream of the underlying bad financials, which SpaceX only managed to mitigate due to the Elon Musk personality trade. (And I agree that this theory falsifiably predicts Anthropic will also find a reason to delay.)
> they're both downstream of the underlying bad financials, which SpaceX only managed to mitigate due to the Elon Musk personality trade
Idk, I'm still sceptical how someone could look at the market right now and conclude that it's suddenly hyperaware of financial metrics.
For whatever reason–maybe it's corporate-structure complexity, maybe it's lawsuits–OpenAI was always at the end of the pack of AI IPOs. If SK Hynix take August and Anthropic September or October, that would mean a 2026 OpenAI IPO would have to (a) coincide with one of those or (b) go to market during an election/post-election fiasco and/or the holidays. The realistic options were July or October, the latter being between a likely Anthropic IPO and the midterms. The timing just doesn't make sense and maybe someone realise that.
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#39[dead]
Re: OpenAI leans toward waiting until next year for IPO
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if your company isn't just blowing smoke then you have nothing to worry about Not really. Plenty of solid companies have to wring their hands around IPO timing based on market conditions. Sometimes, this is due to valuation multiples. Sometimes it's due to fads, e.g. investors preferring capital-structure efficiency versus low leverage.
I mean, my comment wasn't necessarily meant to be some insightful analysis. But I do find it weird that OpenAI has seemingly gone from racing Anthropic to "maybe in 6 months" in the span of a week.
> OpenAI has seemingly gone from racing Anthropic to "maybe in 6 months" in the span of a week
When was the last time someone seriously asked if OpenAI was going to go public before Anthropic? For me, it's been at least months, maybe closer to a year. The corporate-governance complexity drove half of that, momentum the other half, and messaging from both companies having been consistent with that timeline for months sealed the deal.