this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
461 points (95.8% liked)

Technology

60053 readers
3364 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because they spend $2.35 billion in operating costs for every $1 billion in revenue

This is entirely true but also completely normal for a hyperscaler in its first years. At this stage demonstrating a huge demand and your capacity to capture a lot of it is much more important than profitability. You don't exactly bootstrap a company at this level of CapEx.

Their revenue is still growing at a staggering rate, showing no signs of slowing down, and enterprise sales are pretty respectable. I don't know that i'd call 3/4 of a billion in enterprise sales abysmal for a startup in its 2nd year. YMMV i guess.

Sure there is some uncertainty about their model but that's what VC backing is for, right ? They're not building tin can factories with known and predictable business trends, and being valued at 40x your yearly revenue (not profit !) is pretty banal for a successful early stage Deep Tech. We may personally think it's bullshit and choose not to invest in it but it's still far from outrageous and very far from the definition of a bubble.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

For the level of investment in and hype around this company? Yes, those enterprise sales are abysmal. When there are major news articles about their product every single week, they should be doing a lot better than that.

They have demonstrated zero ability at actually "hyperscale". They have no path to getting those costs down. Their conversion rate from free to paid users is atrocious, and they're already raising prices on their plans which is only going to worsen those conversion rates. Their costs to build future models are ballooning exponentially, and theres a decent chance that at some point Microsoft will get sick of subsidizing their compute costs.

Is it possible that they could be successful? Yes. But a lottery ticket would probably be a sounder investment.

For the record, OpenAI themselves are telling those VCs that they should think of their investment more as a "donation" with no expectation of future profit. Absolutely oozing confidence there.

[–] someacnt@sh.itjust.works 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Hypergrowth cult is always "interesting". Because it happened with X, apparently it will happen with Y. Then, unavoidably, it goes through the boom and bust cycle. I am sick of it.

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com -2 points 1 day ago

For the level of investment in and hype around this company? Yes, those enterprise sales are abysmal

I don't see the connection. How are enterprise sales specifically relevant here ? Are enterprise customers known for jumping on top of early stage products where you're from ? Cause where i'm from they're known for being the last ones to board.

They have demonstrated zero ability at actually “hyperscale”.

How would you define hyperscale ? They have one of the biggest GPU fleets around and are likely serving trillions of tokens monthly. That falls well within the range of my personal definition.

They have no path to getting those costs down. Their conversion rate from free to paid users is atrocious, and they’re already raising prices on their plans which is only going to worsen those conversion rates

That's just stuff you say. Atrocious (in your opinion), no path to getting those costs down (in your opinion). Alright, we get it, that's not a company you'd invest in, but then again your investment thesis seems pretty conservative. If a company has to make billions of enterprise sales in its 2nd year, and have double digits conversion early on, then there's not that many successful companies you would have invested in. You certainly wouldn't have put a dime in Uber at 48B valuation 7 years ago - well those who did made a nice return on their investment.

Is it possible that they could be successful? Yes. But a lottery ticket would probably be a sounder investment.

Isn't that the definition of VC-backed startups ? The alternative would be to build a time machine, travel back to the 18th century, and invest in the British textile industry. Sadly they don't make this kind of predictible, risk-free and quickly profitable enterprises nowadays.

Absolutely oozing confidence there

Oh i won't be the one to contradict you here. Sama is one sleazy motherfucker, that's just written on his face. Sadly it doesn't preclude him from building a historical hyperscaler with OpenAI.