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

Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 476 posts

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#441

Post by WarmWash »

randbyte wrote: post #379
WarmWash wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Becoming public allows everyday people to access the wealth generation machine your created. Sometimes I think that the endless cynicism around corporations that exists online is the real ploy by capitalists to keep people poor. It seems to be pretty damn effective at making people allergic to claiming their slice of the pie.

Not after the insiders and investors milked most of the upsides already. As of today: - ABNB right at around their IPO price. - Uber is 75% up… after 6 years. - SNOW came back to break even only after the recent surge.

Again, you can be a cynic and let others have your slice.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#442

Post by epsteingpt »

Why is anyone blaming the company management for 'selling high'.

AI real expectations are about as frothy as they'll ever be.

The latest models have legitimately taken senior coders from execution to agentic babysitting mode - something that was only a dream until last time.

There's a rumor of a $500M MONTHLY Anthropic Bill - that is the equivalent total compensation of 10-15 THOUSAND senior ICs (L5, L6). Imagine what kind of company can spend that amount and pay their staff and somehow 'see value'

The indexing argument is overblown. How many companies of the S&P could the average commenter here name? My guess is - charitably - 30. Yes, weighting, etc. but every indexer here is buying in hundreds of companies they have no idea about the business of, and all of a sudden some percentage goes to a tech company they know about and they want to comment.

Let these people run their victory lap!

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#443

Post by root-parent »

boc wrote: post #127
root-parent wrote: post #19

Time to short the market. We are at peak bubble. "The stock market just did something eerily similar to the dot-com bubble top in 2000" - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/01/the-stock-market-just-did-so...

The amount of actual, hard cash revenue these companies are making is a different ballgame from the dot-com bubble.

We are not at CNBC, and that is the argument you hear there every 15 min from creatures like Cramer but this is about return on capital not revenue.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#444

Post by xracy »

martinald wrote: post #361
xracy wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it? Given that they've had to change the rules of index funds to allow for this, yes, this is not what people expect.

But the US has never had $1T+ IPOs before. And also a huge amount of enormous private companies that don't want to go public for various reasons. Also, the rules have changed before. It's not the first time these rules have changed. I see both sides of the argument (it's definitely _not_ good for 401k investors if Anthropic/OpenAI/SpaceX make huge leaps in technology that allow for far higher earnings that they aren'…

That's justifying this because we've had rampant runaway inflation...

There's nothing special about the number $1T.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#445

Post by randbyte »

WarmWash wrote: post #441
randbyte wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not after the insiders and investors milked most of the upsides already. As of today: - ABNB right at around their IPO price. - Uber is 75% up… after 6 years. - SNOW came back to break even only after the recent surge.

Again, you can be a cynic and let others have your slice.

What’s your argument besides name calling?

Please have it all, as long as don’t force my passive investments to be part of it.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#446

Post by [deleted] »

lmm wrote: post #383
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it was probably prudent to wait. The investors who wanted to take more risk could do that. Retroactive reasoning with investments (if I just bought X) is insane.

> The investors who wanted to take more risk could do that. What? How? By moving out of Massachusetts? I could understand banning such a speculative stock for e.g. pension funds or whatever, but blocking private individuals from buying with their own money seems insane.

[deleted]

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#447

Post by groundzeros2015 »

lmm wrote: post #383
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it was probably prudent to wait. The investors who wanted to take more risk could do that. Retroactive reasoning with investments (if I just bought X) is insane.

> The investors who wanted to take more risk could do that. What? How? By moving out of Massachusetts? I could understand banning such a speculative stock for e.g. pension funds or whatever, but blocking private individuals from buying with their own money seems insane.

You’re right. I read this as banned the state from buying it (pensions etc). I agree that’s absurd if you were not allowed to buy through a broker.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#448

Post by throw0101c »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #386
throw0101c wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are we in a race to see who can pop the bubble first? Just because it's a bubble doesn't mean money can't be made. If you're worried it and the risk involved, perhaps go from 100% equities (100/0) to an allocation that has some bonds (90/10, 80/20, etc ). Rebalance as things get out of whack. There are products that do this rebalancing for you: target-date funds that increase bond allocation as you get closer to re…

If we are still likely to see rising interest rates, bonds feel like a bad idea.

> If we are still likely to see rising interest rates, bonds feel like a bad idea.

Bonds are a bad idea until they're not… at which point it may be too late to buy them.

And you (generally) don't buy bonds for returns (at least not since the '80s). If you can sleep at night with the gyrations of The Market™ then go ahead and skip them, but also keep your timelines in mind (are you hoping to retire in 5-10 years, or make some other use of the money (downpayment)?).

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#449

Post by martinald »

SkiFire13 wrote: post #409
martinald wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's get it in perspective though. The S&P500 market cap is currently $70T. Assume that Anthropic, OpenAI and SpaceX all IPO and get included in SPY with the new fast listing rules. They are likely to be worth $3-4T combined, which means 'retail' investors are going to have perhaps 5% of their portfolio in it. _Arugably_ that's a pretty fair allocation for retail investors to have to these "moonshot" style companies…

> which means 'retail' investors are going to have perhaps 5% of their portfolio in it If I'm not reading it wrong though NASDAQ introduced a 3x multiplier for low-float stocks like SpaceX is most likely going to be (and maybe OpenAI and Anthropic too if they see that it works). A 15% exposure is then going to be pretty big.

Don't think so - the 3x is a separate cap. It actually reduces it down from market cap.

Eg say spaceX has $50bn of float at $1.5T valuation. If there wasn't _any_ cap at all, the full $1.5T would be used as the market cap. With the (new) 3x cap, it means only $150bn of the $1.5T valuation is taken into account in the index weighting.

Before this change, SpaceX wouldn't clear the 10% requirement to be listed in QQQ at all. So the 3x basically allows them to be included but _does not_ increase their market cap from $1.5T to $4.5T.

Btw, for clarity, I'm not saying there isn't questionable behaviour going on here. My main point is that even if SpaceX, openai and anthropic all went to 0 (unlikely IMO), it's not going to have a material impact on people's retirements which is what OP was proposing.

Re: Anthropic confidentially submits draft S-1 to the SEC

#450

Post by tguedes »

randbyte wrote: post #445
WarmWash wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, you can be a cynic and let others have your slice.

What’s your argument besides name calling? Please have it all, as long as don’t force my passive investments to be part of it.

You cherry-picked examples. Counter examples would be:

Crowdstrike up 1067% Cloudflare up 1408% Robinhood up 148%

For an index fund, I would take a break even or even a slight loss on AirBnb to get those Crowdstrike and Cloudflare returns. I do agree with the overall sentiment that the foundation AI companies are overvalued but the whole point of an index fund is not have to analyze each individual company.

Post reply on HN