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

OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 529 posts

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#261

Post by qotgalaxy »

manquer wrote: post #253
SilverElfin wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the GAAP accounting matter if everyone passively buys shares due to the new fast entry rules, which corruptly will force us all to buy into these companies? The fundamentals and true value seem less relevant than ever: https://www.benzinga.com/markets/tech/26/03/51248353/michael...

Diluting the index entry rules, only devalues the index utility. When it becomes a bigger problem, other indices with higher quality controls will out compete the current ones and be used by asset managers seeking safety. More likely than not, most of us are already holding stock in these companies one way or another. All the Mag 7 hold a major chunk of OAI and Anthropic stock anyway, slower entry does not make it le…

[dead]

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#262

Post by ghm2199 »

Does anyone know if this, like the spacex/xAI stock — will list on nasdaq? And will it be part of every market cap weighted index fund like VOO(S&P) etc or just for nasdax-100 etfs?

The exchanges are bending head over heels to accommodate these IPOs[1] and make our retirement index funds the exit-liquidity strategy to the thievery of pump and dump actors that buy it low and then sell high? As i understand the way thievery works is:

1. List at many multiples of market valuation on an exchange. So if you company is just 10 billion$ nasdaq and theives collude and say "can make it 100 billion..".

2. Lots of institutional investors and rich billionaires get stock options.

3. All market weighted index funds — aka all *your* low expense ratio ETF money — have to re-balance and buy them, raising their value: the exit-liquidity event

4. Rich A**** get richer by making an profit by selling higher.

[1] https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/03/31/index-providers...

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#263

Post by HardCodedBias »

adventured wrote: post #173
caycep wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that being said, how can Softbank keep throwing around all these astronomical numbers after so many bad investments? Leftover iPhone money?

Their ~$50 million total Alibaba investment turned into ~$70 billion. As of two years ago they were still liquidating out of it. January 26, 2024 - "Japanese investment holding firm SoftBank Group Corp has largely cleared its ownership in e-commerce giant Alibaba Group Holding, concluding one of the most successful deals in China's internet industry and a holding that spanned about 23 years." "SoftBank, which investe…

"As of two years ago they were still liquidating out of it"

I get that people are scared of investing in China. But if I still made single stock investments, I would seriously consider BABA, it seems well positioned.

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#264

Post by bandrami »

nl wrote: post #252
bandrami wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why should only profits matter? In this case because it's not clear that anybody has actually figured out how to sell inference for more than it costs

It's well know everyone is making great money on inference . The cost is training. Whether GPT-5 was profitable to run depends on which profit margin you’re talking about. If we subtract the cost of compute from revenue to calculate the gross margin (on an accounting basis),2 it seems to be about 30% — lower than the norm for software companies (where 60-80% is typical) but still higher than many industries. (They go…

> It's well know everyone is making great money on inference.

That is not, in fact, "well known", but based entirely on the announcements of the inference providers themselves who also get very cagey when asked to show their work and at least look like they're soliciting a constant firehose of investment money simply to keep the lights on. In particular there's a troubling tendency to call revenue "recurring" before it actually, you know, recurs.

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#265

Post by serioussecurity »

Ethee wrote: post #35
samdjstephens wrote: post #23

> The broad consumer reach of ChatGPT creates a powerful distribution channel into the workplace They mention this line in different forms a couple of times in the article. It’s clear they’re pretty rattled about Anthropic’s momentum in enterprise, I wonder how confident they really are in this rationale.

Kind of makes me wonder how 'accelerated' the timeline of publishing this article was based upon the Claude Code leak today. Considering everyone has gotten a sneak peek at what Anthropic is working on OpenAI might be a little worried. This could also just be coincidence, but this piece really does read like self-encouraging fluff.

0. These things take an enormous amount of time and coordinating to release.

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#266

Post by squirrellous »

gavinray wrote: post #20
nemo1618 wrote: post #7

I'm old enough to remember when companies worth $1 billion were called "unicorns." Now we have a company raising 122 times that? Valued at nearly 1000 times that...? At least they're throwing consumers a bone via the ARK deal. It's crazy how little AI exposure is available to anyone who isn't already wealthy and/or connected.

> At least they're throwing consumers a bone via the ARK deal. I had to look this up. There's a venture fund you can invest in with as little as $500 as a consumer -- though it's limited to quarterly withdrawals. https://www.ark-funds.com/funds/arkvx The fund is invested in most of the hot tech companies.

ARK was all the rage around early pandemic time when wallstreetbets was in the news a lot. Most people probably know it from then.

Re: OpenAI closes funding round at an $852B valuation

#269

Post by amazingamazing »

randomNumber7 wrote: post #78
rvz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic doesn't have anything else other than the Claude models. But notice that no-one , not a single mention of Deepseek tells me that they are preparing to scare everyone again. Which is why Dario continues to scare-monger on local models. Sometimes you do not need hundreds of billions of dollars for inference when it can be done locally with efficient software; and Google proved that. But where is the money in…

Local models just make no economic sense since the GPU will idle 99% of the time.

False on a team that’s distributed
Post reply on HN