[dead]
Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
81–90 of 345 posts
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#82I don’t get what’s the point of non-profits if you can IPO them. How does that make any sense?
They're IPOing a commercial subsidiary of OpenAI so that it can donate even more money to the parent nonprofit. (Actually the subsidiary is everything and the nonprofit is a do-nothing fig leaf but the IRS and Congress seem to not care enough to stop them.)
But then private shareholders are able to extract shareholder value from the subsidiary, so the "nonprofit" component is utterly meaningless here.
How is this not illegal? What prevents any nonprofit from doing this to sidestep its filing status and extract profit?
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#83Elon is not going to be happy about this. He's been vocal about his dislike towards the business model OpenAI chose to run with.
that's not the issue, Elon is just a petulant child that is losing the ai game ever since he left OAI. Elon wanted full control, and that dispute over control is the central issue.
Elon is 100% a for profit person, it's just a 10 year rivalry between Sam and Elon.
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#84Earlier 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% Anthropic and 6% xAI.
When Anthropic spends on xAI, it benefits Google. When google spends on xAI, it benefits Google. When xAI spends on Google, believe it or not, that benefits Google.
This is how a Ponzi -style circular financing scheme typically works.
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#85[dead]
[dead]
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#86I don’t get what’s the point of non-profits if you can IPO them. How does that make any sense?
[dead]
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#87Companies IPOing should be forced to put up their estimated market cap as collateral in cash. Oh what is that? You don't have $1 trillion in cash to put up? Cool, you're not a $1 trillion dollar company then.
Companies always trade at a premium to book, so how would that work?
Last year Chegg was trading below net cash (meaning their market cap was smaller than cash in the bank minus debt). Might still be, I haven't checked in a while. There were maybe a hundred on the Tokyo stock exchange trading below net cash.
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#88Here we go… Let’s see if retail investors are indeed exit liquidity or not
Or just… Americans:
https://www.notus.org/technology/trump-blindsided-ai-compani...
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman pitched the idea of turning over shares in his company to Trump in early 2025 and discussed the matter again with senior officials in recent weeks
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#89I have instructed my financial advisor to keep my exposure to the upcoming wave of AI IPOs as close to zero as possible.
So...all cash?
Re: Confidential submission of draft S-1 to the SEC
#90[dead]