I think this whole premise is ignoring the point that most decently sized companies want to and eventually will be running their own LLM workloads. Currently use cases are limited by scope and imagination, and predominantly focused on cost efficiency. Once a use case becomes a top line revenue driver budgets will become essentially only limited by ROI. There are some inference workloads that are unacceptable to send…
TIL about GPU databases. I did a bit if research but only found this one: https://github.com/bakks/virginian What are the advantages of a GPU database?
70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
41–50 of 102 posts
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’re also at the centre of a lot of circular deals, nvidia in particular is notorious for it and still doing it. From last month: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-27/nvidia-s-... Or from 2025: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/15/a-guide-to-1-trillion-worth-...
I know, but NVIDIA is also the main beneficiary from that whole scheme, what they get out of it is actual cash. They hyperscalers have a more complicated role though
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#43Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
One interpretation is that so called profitability is one 15 minute phone call between OpenAI and Anthropic to increase prices. If you think that antitrust is the reason that this won't happen, you've stated a speculation. Not a certainty.
They are pressured by open models to reduce prices, not increase
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Here's an example: https://www.wheresyoured.at/exclusive-openai-financials/ Zitron wrote: > Additional factors – including interest income and interest expense – left it with a net loss of $8.84 billion. It then marked $3.74 billion of losses as “net loss attributable to noncontrolling members capital,” leaving the net loss attributable to the company as $5.09 billion. > It’s unclear what this means, nor how Op…
But how does that detract from the overall point that Open AI is losing billions of dollars? If there's an insatiable demand for AI compute, where's the profit?
Zitron continually presents things in ways that create a hyperbolic narrative. Turning routine consolidation accounting into an unexplained mystery hinting at some sort of fraud is the perfect example of that. He does it so often and in such a way that I truly believe he just doesn't understand accounting.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that OpenAI is losing money. But the question ("where's the profit?") assumes that profit is the thing being optimized for. It isn't.
There are basically three buckets here: cost of serving a query, cost of training and capex for capacity.
The first one is unit economics. The other two are bets on the future that get expensed against present revenue. A company can serve every query at a healthy gross margin (OpenAI has improved margins considerably) and still have a $9 billion loss because it spent $12 billion training a model that generates $0 this year.
Zitron constantly blends everything into a pithy "they lose money on everything" narrative, which just isn't accurate. The thing is that OpenAI could have a very different P&L if it chose to, say, stop training the next model.
The problem, obviously, is that if you stop training the next model, the competition might eat you. So right now you have a situation where the the frontier model you spent $12 billion on depreciates in about 18 months, the GPUs depreciate on a schedule nobody agrees on, and you seemingly can't stop the cycle without risking your position in the market.
This is the legitimate bear case, but the problem with Zitron is that he doesn't make it using an argument that is coherent and honest as far as the accounting is concerned. And the accounting is everything.
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mind sharing more details?
Sure. Here's an example: https://www.wheresyoured.at/exclusive-openai-financials/ Zitron wrote: > Additional factors – including interest income and interest expense – left it with a net loss of $8.84 billion. It then marked $3.74 billion of losses as “net loss attributable to noncontrolling members capital,” leaving the net loss attributable to the company as $5.09 billion. > It’s unclear what this means, nor how Op…
This can of course be used to distort the financial picture and this is a significant amount, almost 50% of losses. Is this from the ‘non-profit’ which used to be OpenAI or something else?
Smells like creative accounting to me and the CEO was accused by his board of dishonesty.
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Here's an example: https://www.wheresyoured.at/exclusive-openai-financials/ Zitron wrote: > Additional factors – including interest income and interest expense – left it with a net loss of $8.84 billion. It then marked $3.74 billion of losses as “net loss attributable to noncontrolling members capital,” leaving the net loss attributable to the company as $5.09 billion. > It’s unclear what this means, nor how Op…
Maybe I am little confused here but what you just described here doesn't sound great either? What smaller entities who OpenAI is parent to lost 3.74 billion dollars? Or maybe just can you point to some primary sources about this? I am not too bright about this stuff.. I guess I always thought it was usually about having more money than when you started? Or at least about having a story of how you will have more money…
OpenAI isn't a single company. I haven't followed all the details with its structure change/recapitalization, but it's (I believe) a parent sitting on top of an LLC that outside investors like Microsoft hold a large minority stake in.
The rules say that the parent has to report 100% of the LLC's revenue and expenses as if it owned everything and then, at the end, back out the share of the loss that economically belongs to the minority holders.
So $8.84 billion is the whole loss, $3.74 billion is approximately the outside members' proportional share of it, and $5.09 billion is what's left for the parent. Nothing disappeared or was hidden. It's one number presented two ways because two sets of people own it.
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Here's an example: https://www.wheresyoured.at/exclusive-openai-financials/ Zitron wrote: > Additional factors – including interest income and interest expense – left it with a net loss of $8.84 billion. It then marked $3.74 billion of losses as “net loss attributable to noncontrolling members capital,” leaving the net loss attributable to the company as $5.09 billion. > It’s unclear what this means, nor how Op…
Can you explain which partly owned subsidiaries lost $3.74 billion and why it is legitimate to exclude that from their losses in a non-handwavy fashion? Your condemnation leaves me none the wiser and this does matter. This can of course be used to distort the financial picture and this is a significant amount, almost 50% of losses. Is this from the ‘non-profit’ which used to be OpenAI or something else? Smells like c…
https://dart.deloitte.com/USDART/home/codification/broad-tra...
I get that not everyone is an accountant or has had to become educated in accounting matters as part of their work, but you really shouldn't say "smells like creative accounting to me" if you don't have a basic understanding of the subject.
This is like the least interesting thing about OpenAI's financials, and Zitron framing it as some sort of mystery hinting at fraud is one of the least effective ways to make a point given that it's absolutely a nothingburger.
No loss is disappearing or being hidden. This is by-the-book consolidation accounting.
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#49I think this whole premise is ignoring the point that most decently sized companies want to and eventually will be running their own LLM workloads. Currently use cases are limited by scope and imagination, and predominantly focused on cost efficiency. Once a use case becomes a top line revenue driver budgets will become essentially only limited by ROI. There are some inference workloads that are unacceptable to send…
but this is just an absolute fantasy, what, exactly, will this compute be doing? Our lives are already deeply entwined with technology and use barely any compute. How could our lives become 100x more dependent on compute? You can be thrilled by this exciting technology and all the possibilities it brings without thinking it is going to require this huge capital investment in GPUs. You could radically change billions…
Do and sync over client to client.
Keep data local again.
Only use cloud for backups of local client encrypted blobs of vectors:data
If you get rid of a lot of the suspect semantics hallucinated up over decades of software development it's not hard to see the geometry of an electronic snowflake. All the language just obfuscates the elegance. Crude meat suit grunts and clicks.
Streamline it all to management of geometric states and access control and put the semantics on the presentation layer. What if we don't need python and go and ruby anymore? Made sense in a pre-gpu everywhere reality. Could just be high school stats classes to generate sets of values. Let go of the obscure linguistic chants.
The data centers are just to serve surveillance purposes. Obfuscated behind politically correct memes of creating jobs.
Chip away at the monolith and atomize the topology
Re: 70% of AI revenue comes from OpenAI and Anthropic [video]
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are pressured by open models to reduce prices, not increase
Why do people continue to use them despite the existence of so many open weights models? This is "priced in." Short of stealing the checkpoints straight from the servers, it's unlikely to change.
Because of the low prices lol.