- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Market debut of AI company behind Claude chatbot will be one of largest in US history, a test of its financial viability
Anthropic has publicly filed for a stock market listing, one of the largest debuts in history. The company’s float on the US market is likely to be a high-water mark in the multitrillion-dollar AI boom and a test of its financial viability.
Analysts and investors have valued the San Francisco-based company, founded in 2021, at more than $1.5tn. The company, which will will list under the symbol ANT, confidentially filed with US financial regulators for an initial public offering in June.
You must log in or # to comment.
How did they justify that valuation? All i could find in the article is what they EXPECT AI to do and they have a “rapidly growing customer base”?
Nothing about how they plan on providing $1.5t of value, just “its AI its gonna cure cancer do you wanna get left behind?!?”
Maybe a combination of cocaine and dice.
Look up project Stargate, follow the money, it wont take much digging to figure out the why and the who.
So the investors want to get rid of the risks in their books. Hopefully they find enough MAGAs to sell the shit to.
Anyone with a retirement plan will be exposed to this as well.
All of us will be exposed to it if you have etf’s or a target market fund invested
While (probably) not technical fraud, there is massive accounting BS in their financial reporting. $3.6B in Sales and marketing expenses has $400B+ hidden through capitalizing free services as “customer acquisition”, but rest of it is commissions paid to GOOG/AMZN partners, and shouldn’t even be part of revenue. They also capitalize training/fine tuning costs even though 1 month release schedule for model versions make previous model version worthless.
So the big lies are “operational profit” and revenue is greater than compute costs. They will have to drop Q3 results officially before IPO, and reason they didn’t is their Q2 apparent revenue to compute cost ratio lie, also hid that they got $2.5B free rental worth from xAI as part of their circular fraud deal to rent from them temporarily at absurdly inflated prices.
They are simply going to be the first. The first to get barely vetted before the IPO is approved. The first to have any circumstances waived. It won’t matter how bad the financials are because it’s already too late. The bubble is leaking but it’s still inflatable so just keep pumping because the only people left with enough money to keep it afloat are the only ones who are gonna make money when it crashes.
SpaceX was first. Even bigger fraud with circumstances waived to get in early on NASDAQ indexes. It’s a much larger overspending AI money pit, and still highly inflated.
We believe AI is one of the most consequential technologies in human history
HAH
Shit’s gonna pump then dump like you’ve never seen before.
The big companies have to IPO to transfer all this investor debt to mutual funds and retirement funds before it goes crash. Can’t be them on the hook for this when it pops.
Luckily S&P is blocking some of these shenanigans by not allowing inclusion into the S&P500 for companies that are not profitable even if they become publicly listed. This includes all of the AI only companies.
Because so many large investment funds have dumped their money in these AI companies they will still take down the entire stock market when they go bust. There is so much money which does not exist inside of the bubble.
Do you have any articles or more information on the S&P blocking them?
article: The S&P 500 won’t bend its rules to let SpaceX in early
“In a Thursday news release, the index provider announced it was holding firm on all three contested criteria — the one-year waiting period before new listings can qualify, the requirement for demonstrated profitability, and minimum public float thresholds — regardless of how large a company may be. ‘Exceptions to the financial viability, seasoning, and IWF requirements should not be granted solely based on market capitalization,’ the company said. The decision preserves existing methodology without alteration.”
I checked vanguard when spacex floated and they had a good explainer. I didn’t dig deep enough to find it on the S&P documentation, but in this article under 3 things to consider, it mentions S&P requires a company to be profitable in its recent quarter or the sum of its previous 4 quarters https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/articles/staying-grounded-moonshot-ipos.html
And if the debt is in the retirement funds, it’s a guarantee that the government will bail it out because they’re holding old people hostage. Yuck.
Fed can’t bailout shit with inflation running as hot as it already is (they’re already fudging the numbers to keep Social Security payments down). Dumping the bag onto retirement accounts (mutual funds, ETFs, etc.) is the bailout.
They can’t, but they will anyway!
Let the retirement funds crash. Maybe it’ll finally teach them not to trust crime-riddled, unregulated Wall Street with their futures.
They will get a nice bailout from whatever Democrat or Republican is in charge.
Exactly.
We should have let the market crash years ago, so we could begin building something more sustainable in its place.
Instead, it’s what, tripled in size more or less? The fall is only going to be that much harder as a result…
Just pile it on the backs of the damn lazy youths amiright
Yeah. They haven’t contributed nearly as much as my old ass. What gives them the right?!
Coming out here all like “oh I just want what you had” and “why are things worse” and shit like “social security will be insolvent for me” like a bunch of whining hippies.
Company that has lost $125,000,000,000 in 6 years think it’s worth $1,500,000,000,000.
What a time to be alive.
I’m more profitable than Anthropic, check please
Please, sir, I would like a billion dollars.
Yeah, how else would they pay off that $125 trillion, without the imaginary $150 trillion that they’re begging for.
Cart before the horse? Maybe. Unconventional? They prefer the term “innovative”…
I get it. I found an old rock in a ditch that has a unique shape that I like. I value it at around 150 million dollars. BOOM! Economy solved!
Economics degrees are astrology for white men. This only reinforces that point.
As someone with an economics-heavy business degree, I have said this since my intro to economics course. The fact that there are “schools”, and that some mainstream theories last only for years, not even decades, and that all governments who come in will “try” a “recipe” to see what works, is telling enough. The “laws” of economics are “kinda”, “usually”, “generally”, and above all “conditional”. There are a few things that are almost laws, like the fact that humanity is driven by the seven cardinal sins of which most can be translated into economic characteristics, and cycles (which we are hell bent in forgetting every time we are at a crest).
I’m thermodynamic’s removed. That shit is. You can’t cheat them laws.
The fact that the seven cardinal sins have officially been codified as a principle of economics is… telling…
What are the primary drivers of humanity? Lust, greed, envy, gluttony, sloth, wrath, and pride.
“Now how can we exploit that to extract more profit” is a question only a sociopath would ask. It explains so much about industry today though, especially marketing and yes, social media.
And gambling, let’s not forget the casinos and lottery raffles
The kind of gambling where the biggest losers are the ones who are not participating, and they keep whining that the winners should give them something too.
Ah yes, the self acclaimed winner in the wild.
Big toes youve got there, winning!
I’m doing quite ok, actually. Most probably better than 99% of the people commenting here in just about every way possible.
I’m not really a gambling man, though.
I’m stealing this.
It would be so much more valuable as a social science/philosophy. Quantitative economics ruined the field
Astrology has more reality than economics does. At least the movements and positions of the planets is something real.
People used to navigate by it, plant and harvest by it, nomads would migrate by the movements of the stars.
Economics is just… “How much confirmation bias can we use to rationalize conclusions we’ve already determined in advance, in order to convince governments and investors to give us money that doesn’t even exist?” and “How can we frame these numbers to keep people from rioting?”
At least the movements and positions of the planets is something real.
Yes but being sad because mercury is in gatorade or whatever isn’t “real”, it’s literally prescribed to you by someone who says that when planets do X then your mood or success in whatever endeavors must be Y and Z
If the only thing you’ve heard about astrology is the “newspaper horoscopes” that attempt to be prescriptive in that way, then I could see having that opinion.
I would also argue that people who read those horoscopes and take them seriously, also do not understand astrology.
My point is that “Mercury in retrograde” is a real phenomenon, unlike “self-regulating market” or “rational/ethical consumer,” or any of the other things economists use to try to justify deregulation, austerity, and “infinite growth.”
My argument isn’t that Mercury retrograde has any effect on your mood. That’s a claim I didn’t make. But from the perspective of earth, there are times when Mercury appears to reverse its course. The other planets do it too. Hence, it is “more real than economics.”
There absolutely are real phenomenon in economics. There are none in astrology that have been proven.
But from the perspective of earth, there are times when Mercury appears to reverse its course. The other planets do it too
But that’s not astrology. Astrology is the art of giving it mysterious meanings. Mercury being in retrograde is an astronomical phenomenon.
The problem with economics is that it’s essentially sociology and you obviously can’t make absolute laws about things that involve people. But I’ll give you two simple examples that absolutely have been proven time and time again:
-
Induced demand - if you make something more available (cheaper), that in of itself is usually enough to make demand for it higher.
-
Inelastic demand - if something is an absolute necessity then it becoming more expensive doesn’t reduce demand to 0 (healthcare, fuel).
#2, incidentally, is one reason why markets will never be truly efficient and need to be regulated. The equilibrium of supply and demand can’t be what determines the price of healthcare, transportation, etc.
Economics blows up when you try to make things absolute rules, or when you try to rationalize markets that have people with tons of money FOMOing bullshit based on marketing. Two problems come to mind:
-
The P/E ratio of 10 is stated as a rule in investing, but there’s no reason that’s the exact right amount, it’s really just something that on average, people buying stocks find a sensible return rate because similar rates could be achieved elsewhere too.
-
Conversely to the last point, people marketing IPOs for companies making zero profit will convince you that really horrible P/E is fine because those companies will take over the entire global market for whatever. See, that’d be true IFF there’s a market AND they remain the biggest player. Just because a P/E ratio of 10 being optimal isn’t an absolute law of the universe doesn’t mean a P/E ratio of 1000 is any good.
-
As stated to you in a other comment. Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same. The only similarities they have is relying on the position of planets and celestial bodies. Astrology is pure pseudoscience.
Seeing as economics is also a pseudoscience, I don’t see how that contradicts my point at all.
I said the movements of the stars and planets as described by astrology is a real phenomenon. Unless you want to dispute that, you’re arguing against a strawman of your own construction.
You’re confusing astrology and astronomy.
No, astronomy is the modern science of measuring and studying outer space. It grew out of astrology in the same way that the modern science of chemistry grew out of alchemy.
Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same thing. Astrology has nothing to do with navigation or planting/harvesting cycles. The only similarities astrology has with any of that is the position of planets, but astrology is strictly a divinatory practice.
If you don’t see the inherent connection between those two things, then I don’t know what to tell you.
If an ancient boat captain was consulting an ephemeris to determine their exact position, who do you think wrote/published the ephemeris?
Long before written language was ever invented, who do you think was studying the stars and saying “now is the time to plant”?
If that’s “divinatory” then so be it, but looking at it from a modern lens of how the term is commonly used today, is anachronistic. And it doesn’t change my original point anyway, because the movements of the stars are real, unlike the so-called “laws” of economics.
The headlines have finally started turning and calling it what it is: a bubble economy about to burst.
They’ve finally started saying “these companies are overvalued with no real strategy or profitability, and the receipts are about to come due.”
So what do the tech companies do in response? “Quick! Pump and dump! Pump and dump!”
It’s a fucking ponzi scheme. How have we not learned this yet as a society?
I wonder who will be stupid enough to buy this burning stock. With the value based on fantasy, the gargantuan losses being real, the tangible value being close to zero (most of them don’t even own the data centers, they lease them) and a product that will probably never achieve what they promise, they will need a special kind of customer. Maybe they should do mailings to the people who bought Trumps’ crypto coins…
You’d think the people whose jobs it is to understand that would see through it. But if they’re approved for the IPO, then I think some funds will be forced by policy to buy
Yes keep inflating that bubble
I am gonna list me. 2.8 trillion.
Convince us. How many billions of dollars did you lose last quarter?
I’m sad to announce I cannot list me with a trillion dollar valuation, I haven’t lost even a single billion dollars this quarter.
… fuck that lol.
This is going to be a problem when all of our 401ks buy into it and we all end up being the bagholders
I’ve been trying to move my retirement accounts into funds that are better insulated from an AI bubble pop, but it’s challenging. I mainly moved into funds based on international stocks and low- to mid-cap stocks. The high-cap stock funds are almost entirely AI-fueled companies right now. They’re making crazy returns, but I just don’t trust them.
Most etfs that focus on dividend yields have very little AI exposure because AI companies don’t make enough money and aren’t mature enough to issue dividends.
Those aren’t also going to get you an early retirement so you could start leeching off the working class sooner, dividend paying companies don’t usually grow much.
There are sharia indexes that don’t contain the same mixture of top stocks. I think SpaceX is excluded from that one because of the defense contracting stuff they do.
Greed and FOMO are going to drive a lot of investors to buy into the Anthropic IPO just like it did SpaceX. That seems to be what’s driving the market these days. Admittedly, that’s somehow been much more sustainable than I ever thought possible, and as a result I’ve missed out on some significant gains, but that’s because I know for certain this can’t go on forever. Eventually someone’s going to be left holding the bag.
Based on the laws of the universe. It will pop precisely when I decide to invest.
But I won’t. So it won’t pop. I’m sorry.
Could you at least invest a dollar?
I will set up a go fund me for you for $300 when this ipo happens if you promise to buy a share.
Mannnn this is going to be one hell of a test
