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

Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 345 posts

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#161

Post by mceoin »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #75
krona wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need to financially engineer a good looking quarter beforehand. Perhaps Larry Ellison can cut them a nice quid pro quo for a few months to make OpenAI look profitable (like the SpaceX/Anthropic deal), although that's probably unlikely given the debt Oracle is taking on to build it's infra.

> like the SpaceX/Anthropic deal I understand the scepticism around Google's deal with SpaceX, given the former holds a stake in the latter. But Anthropic buying SpaceX's compute doesn't have any related-party smell to it. That genuinely looks like SpaceX having cornered some valuable compute.

Google owns 14% of Anthropic.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#164

Post by panopticon »

HDBaseT wrote: post #134
vessenes wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX IPO is slated to be $75-80bn — the market has size for that. We also have seen robust options and finance markets for AAPL and NVDA over the last years that make the broader ecosystem not overly worrying in my armchair opinion. I’m not clear how much crossover demand there is between SX and Anthropic/oAI — that seems like the more interesting question. I’m guessing if we had Anthropic/oAI launching at the same…

I was under the impression SpaceX was going to be a trillion dollar company. The media and market is hyping these three companies up to be all trillion dollar companies.

Afaik SpaceX is only putting 5% of its shares up on the public market when it IPOs (newly minted shares, diluting the existing private shareholders).

So the markets only "need to absorb" $75B when SpaceX IPOs, not its whole $1.7T valuation. At least until the lockup period expires.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#165

Post by chippiewill »

to11mtm wrote: post #157
tedsanders wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nonprofit (OpenAI Foundation) owns ~26% of the for-profit, plus some extra warrants. The for-profit (OpenAI Group PBC) is what's filing the S-1 Draft. The OpenAI Foundation also exclusively appoints the board of the OpenAI Group PBC and can replace directors at any time. https://openai.com/our-structure/ (I work at OpenAI, but I am not a lawyer and am not speaking on behalf of OpenAI - just sharing my personal un…

If they truly wanted it to be in the benefit of the not-for-profit and safe from interference, the ownership by the foundation would be much closer to or just over 50%.... just thinking out loud...

The magic 50% ownership isn't relevant for that purpose. There are special provisions which means that the Foundation effectively exerts full control over the company because it appoints the entire board.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#166

Post by bee_rider »

bleepblap wrote: post #151
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's nice way to say "invested in AI that turned out to be flop nobody wants to pay for so they are selling spare capacity" Both takes are true. xAI invested in capacity that was supposed to yield frontier-model-maker margins. Grok failed to generate enough interest. So now they're selling it. That's absolutely a good business, in a way that's more certain than the frontier-model one. But it's also lower margin,…

What I don't understand is how it's even a good low-margin business. Maybe I'm missing something but: Data centers (before recently) are low margin businesses because all the inputs are commodities: you buy power (joules), power (PDU), cooling hardware, physical racks, etc.. from the same vendors as everyone else. Worse, your biggest potential clients have the scale to just build it on their own and cut you out becau…

I wonder if they do have non-commodity AI capabilities, just, ones that don’t translate into a world-class frontier model.

Like they might have hired really good AI infra folks, gotten really good uptimes on their nodes, gotten folks who really know how to configure Infiniband (or whatever). But then, didn’t find the folks who knew what to run on that infrastructure. Or maybe Grok just had too much political drama around it.

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#168

Post by thin_carapace »

dofm wrote: post #150
HDBaseT wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a tech billionaire, you don't marry unless you are incredibly stupid. Altman and Thiel are also gay, so theres that too.

No idea where this comes from; I wasn't talking about a literal family tree but a figurative one (I grew up with Rock Family Trees ) Also: Altman is married.

i think i was trying to make the point that the type of person to make a shitload of money tends to be the type of person to hold onto a shitload of money

Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC

#169

Post by system2 »

andsoitis wrote: post #156
chakintosh wrote: post #97

I have a feeling that as soon as OpenAI and Anthropic stocks are up for grabs, the market will implode.

> the market Which market? The stock market? Or the tech stocks? Or something else?

Then someone says the market; they definitely mean the stock market. I don't know what else you can understand from it.
Post reply on HN