Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

techinasia.com

421–430 of 720 posts

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is much closer to the dotcom boom than the subprime stuff. The dotcom boom/bust affected tech more than anything else. It didn’t involve consumers like the housing crash did.

[flagged]

1. Claude Code is claimed to have hit €500m ARR in 3 months.

2. What is the Claude Code profit for the same period?

3. What is the Claude Code profit per request served when excluding fixed expenses such as training the models?

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#422
post #347
post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment they start mixing ads into responses Ill stop using them. Open models are good enough, its just more convenient to use chatgpt right now, but that can change.

People said the same thing about so many other online services since the 90s. The issue is that you're imagining ChatGPT as it exists right now with your current use case but just with ads inserted into their product. That's not really how these things go... instead OpenAI will wait until their product becomes so ingrained in everyday usage that you can't just decide to stop using them. It is possible, although not c…

Except that I have switched to Gemini and not missed anything from OpenAI

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#423
post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is OpenAI's competitive moat? There's no product stickiness here. What prevents people from just using Google, who can build AI stuff into their existing massive search/ads/video/email/browser infrastructure? Normal, non-technical users can't tell the difference between these models at all, so their usage numbers are highly dependent on marketing. Google has massive distribution with world-wide brands that peopl…

Consumer brand quality is so massively underrated by tech people. ChatGPT has a phenomenal brand. That's worth 100x more than "product stickiness". They have 700 million weekly users and growing much faster than Google. I think your points on Google being well positioned are apt for capitalization reasons, but only one company has consumer mindshare on "AI" and its the one with "ai" in its name.

> They have 700 million weekly users and growing much faster than Google.

Years old company growing faster than decades old company!

2.5 billion people use Gmail. I assume people check their mail (and, more importantly, receive mail) much more often than weekly.

ChatGPT has a lot of growing to do to catch up, even if it's faster

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#424
post #362
post #231

I think people are massively underestimating the money they will come from ads in the future. They generated $4.3B in revenue without any advertising program to monetise their 700 million weekly active users, most of whom use the free product. Google earns essentially all of its revenue from ads, $264B in 2024. ChatGPT has more consumer trust than Google at this point, and numerous ways of inserting sponsored results…

What is OpenAI's competitive moat? There's no product stickiness here. What prevents people from just using Google, who can build AI stuff into their existing massive search/ads/video/email/browser infrastructure? Normal, non-technical users can't tell the difference between these models at all, so their usage numbers are highly dependent on marketing. Google has massive distribution with world-wide brands that peopl…

> There's no product stickiness here.

Very few of those 700,000,000 active users have ever heard of Claude or DeepSeek or ________. Gemini maybe.

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#425
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How long did it take for 9 out of 10 of those rail lines to become nonviable? Records from the time are few and far between, but, from what I can tell, it looks like they likely weren't ever actually viable. The records do show that the railways were profitable for a short while, but it seems only because the government paid for the infrastructure. If they had to incur the capital expenditure themselves, the math d…

> The records do show that the railways were profitable for a short while, but it seems only because the government paid for the infrastructure. If they had to incur the capital expenditure themselves, the math doesn't look like it would math. Actually, governments in the US rarely actually provided any capital to the railroads. (Some state governments did provide some of the initial capital for the earliest railroad…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#426
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How long did it take for 9 out of 10 of those rail lines to become nonviable? Records from the time are few and far between, but, from what I can tell, it looks like they likely weren't ever actually viable. The records do show that the railways were profitable for a short while, but it seems only because the government paid for the infrastructure. If they had to incur the capital expenditure themselves, the math d…

> The records do show that the railways were profitable for a short while, but it seems only because the government paid for the infrastructure. If they had to incur the capital expenditure themselves, the math doesn't look like it would math. Actually, governments in the US rarely actually provided any capital to the railroads. (Some state governments did provide some of the initial capital for the earliest railroad…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ChatGpt has won. I talk to all teens living nearby and they all use chatgpt and not Google. The teens, they don't know what is OpenAI, they don't know what is Gemini. They sure know what is ChatGPT.

All of these teens use Google Docs instead of OpenAI Docs, Google Meet instead of OpenAI Meet, Gmail instead of OpenAI Mail, etc. I'm sure that far fewer people to go gemini.google.com than to chatgpt.com, but Google has LLMs seamlessly integrated in each of these products, and it's a part of people's workflows at school and at work. For a while, I was convinced that OpenAI had won and that Google won't be able to re…

I think the beneficiary is wrong here. Those teens will grow up to work for organizaitons using Azure AD, Windows, Office and OneDrive/SharePoint/Teams.

If any company is going to get the windfall of "AI provider by default" it is going to be Microsoft. Possibly powered by OpenAI models running on Azure.

Google could make a "better" (basically - more sublime) advertising platform but little to attract new users. Perhaps Android usage would rise - Apple _is_ behind on AI after all. On the other hand, users will either use the AI integrated into Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Teams, Edge and more, or else users' AI of choice (ChatGPT) will learn to as competently drive the Windows and Web UIs as Claude Code drives bash, giving a productive experience with your desktop (and cloud) apps.

Once you use _that_ tool, its now where you start asking questions, not google.com. I am constantly asking ChatGPT and Claude about things I might be purchasing, making comparisons, etc (amongst many other things I might possibly google). Microsoft has an existing interest in advertising, and OpenAI is currently exploring how best go about it. My bet isn't on Google right now.

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#428
post #258
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both numbers are entirely ludicrous - highly skilled people are certainly quite valuable. But it's insane that these companies aren't just training up more internally. The 50x developer is a pervasive myth in our industry and it's one that needs to be put to rest.

> it's insane that these companies aren't just training up more internally Adding headcount to a fast growing company *to lower wages* is a sure way to kill your culture, lower the overall quality bar and increase communication overheads significantly. Yes they are paying a lot of their employees and the pool will grow, but adding bodies to a team that is running well in hopes that it will automatically lead to a bum…

Have worked in BigCo three times scaling teams from 5 to 50 people. This post is bang on.

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#429
post #286

That headline can't be correct. Income is revenues minus expenses (and a few other things). You can't have both an income and a loss at the same time. It's $4.3B in revenue .

Every indebted person can tell you that you can have an income and loss at the same time. Income is revenue.

We’re talking about a business here. Accounting terms are standard across the industry, and the meaning of income is well understood.

Unfortunately, journalistic standards vary across the Internet. The WSJ or Financial Times would not make such a mistake.

Re: OpenAI's H1 2025: $4.3B in income, $13.5B in loss

#430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an exceptionally obvious solution for OpenAI & ChatGPT: ads. In fact it's an unavoidable solution. There is no future for OpenAI that doesn't involve a gigantic, highly lucrative ad network attached to ChatGPT. One of the dumbest things in tech at present is OpenAI not having already deployed this. It's an attitude they can't actually afford to maintain much longer. Ads are a hyper margin product that are ve…

Google didn't have inline ads until 2010, but they did have separate ads nearly from the beginning. I assume ads will be inline for OpenAI- I mean the only case they could be separate is in ChatGPT, but I doubt that will be their largest use case.

I think it was actually about 5 years from founding to ads on Google.com.
Post reply on HN