Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- I cannot read the article. Does it say anything about profit?by Gys
- Not a single mention. It’s all „revenue”. And as the downvoters are surely aware: profit != revenue.
- > Anthropic has projected revenue of at least $10.9 billion for the second quarter of 2026, more than double the previous quarter, on track for its first quarterly operating profit of $559 million.by yen223
- What market size do they think AI will be in 2028 to give that prognosis.by christkv
- China keeps eating their lunch tho, have you guys seen the new deepseek harness?? Get ready to have your mind blown.by bzmrgonz
- Idk, but for me it is ridiculous, people still doubt these valuations. SpaceX was of course non sense. But to value those companies lower than 1 trillion??? Please, link some source to change my mind.by chrisXOXO
- I love Claude but as soon as there is a viable replacement and I get around to it, I’m gone. I have zero loyalty to a chatbot and when the interface is just text the cost of switching is up to my personal whims.by iamleppert
- me too except mine is called Claudia and I think she is really sweet and understands me. ;Oby formvoltron
- It's here already, called chatgpt 5.6 solby toephu2
- I switched to codex after using Claude for a year. Faster, cheaper and smart (not sure smarter) but it likes to do things by itself without asking for clarification.by import
- Anyone believing that this company will surpass Nvidia's revenue in 2028 is seeking a lot of exit liquidity to dump hundreds of millions of their stock after the first earnings release.
> The projection dwarfs the $47 billion revenue "run rate," reflecting the firm's current pace of business, that the company publicized as recently as May, and shows the scale of growth investors are being asked to underwrite.
Never do they account for competition, risks, delays, lawsuits and geo-political issues. Seems like this is massaged to get tens of millions of retail traders holding an expensive designer bag that is riddled with holes.
by rvz - > "Could they (Anthropic) get a $2 trillion valuation, yeah they could and I just wonder if it would stay there over time"
Can someone explain exactly how the market can in any sense support not one but two trillion dollar valuations (referencing spacex as the first)? (I imagine openai will likely be in the same ballpark) genuinely we're reaching "elementary levels of big funny number" in the market.
by tolugenius - Apple has a $4.5 trillion valuation, and it just makes pretty consumer widgets. The global B2B economy is massive.by rayiner
- Well, if Anthropic actually makes $200B revenue in 2028 then that valuation is justified, depending on how fat their margins are.by jrflo
- Can someone explain exactly how the market can in any sense support not one but two trillion dollar valuations
Suppose there are 100 million jobs that can benefit from spending $10k/year in tokens. At a conservative 30% margin and subtracting $100 billion for expenses that's $200 billion in annual profits, which can easily support a $5T market cap. And that's just scaling up today's use cases, not even considering the possibility of labs having their secret internal models doing drug discovery or quant trading or other profitable hobbies.
by orangecat - The "valuation" is based on market capitalization, so the market "supports" it because of the mass hysteria of "perceived value." When a big IPO gets automatically added to a major stock index (such as NASDAQ or S&P 500), all the mutual funds which include holdings that mirror the indexes will automatically buy and hold shares. Lots of employee 401k money and pension fund investments are supporting the mutual funds, which are perceived as "safe."
To put it in fewer words; the stock market is rigged.
by anonymousiam - A $2tn IPO does mean $2tn materialized out of nowhere. What matters is how big the liquid market is, and that is a much smaller number.by adastra22
- The world doesn't make sense to me. I use 5.6 Luna. Deepseek v4 flash 0731. And kimi k3. Don't even need claude anymore at their insane prices for anything I do.by zackify
- I walk to work and ride a bicycle in my free time, don’t see why anybody would need a hatchback or semi truck or build rockets. Idiotsby weitendorf
- 200usd/mo for Claude gives me tens of thousands of dollars of value.
API prices are paid by companies getting tens of millions of dollars of value.
In normal life money is the key constraint; buy this don't buy that etc. - whereas in VC funded companies the constraint is time. If you as a founder get funding and don't spend it fast enough you put yourself at serious risk of being replaced.
When enough of the world operates on that principle it creates a highly price insensitive market and that then can support a ton of ideas and experiments, some of which turn out to be really really good. It's a wild way to do innovation but it's been working well for decades.
by cadamsdotcom - > Don't even need claude anymore at their insane prices for anything I do.
What insane price is that? Pro is $20 per month. Same price as a Netflix ad free sub.
by bossyTeacher - In many things in life it’s wise to think further than just what suits your needs personallyby Marciplan
- If you're primarily writing code yourself or meticulously reviewing the output from agents, then you're right. However, if you tried to have any of those models one-shot an app or do some highly agentic work, they would certainly fail. That's the future people are looking towards with these valuations: when its no longer economical for humans to write or even understand code, just let the models drive because they are superhuman at it. Not saying we are there today, but that's when you really start to see the benefit of more expensive models. Luna or Deepseek flash would never find any of the mathematical discoveries or security exploits that the larger models can find.by jrflo
- What enterprises pay for is all that matters. They pay insane amounts for a lot of things I would never do personally, but I'm not the target demographic in those cases.by surajrmal