Posted by dgellow 1 day ago
Caveats: It's hard to believe that this growth rate would continue. And Meta's numbers above are trailing 12 months, while Anthropic's are annualized run rate.
Also, ARR as in Annualized Run Rate is a bullshit, non-standard metric only used to mislead investors
This is a bit misleading and based on projections of prior reported months. Growth has already slowed, Q3 in dollars was less than Q2. The timing aligns largely with the growth (since mid-summer) of open weight models.
https://www.regenerator1.com/p/anthropics-growth-just-flatte...
Since they actually have paying customers, it's a completely different sort of thing than for Meta. The question is instead whether they can keep at the frontier, whether the compute they've signed up for is good enough, etc.
There's a value proposition in which direction the stock is going to go and how long it's going to take to get there. It only makes sense to be invested in a stock if you think it's going to be worth more later than it is now and the amount of time your money is tied up in this stock is commensurate with the profit you may get as a result.
Investors work on limited information about companies, and having a track record can influence a buying decision one way or another. It may matter to some investors and not to others. For many, it's weighed against the price of the stock. Would you bet $100 on a company with a short track record? What about $10,000, $100,000, or more? Generally there's a point where people drop out of buying more of a stock and say that they can't justify the risk given the information they have. That's the expected value that Anthropic will receive from that investor.
Anthropic needs to worry about what that number is for a huge amount of individual investors and how to maximize the amount of money put into the cost of their stocks, and there's very little chance that they can attract the biggest pool of investor money without some of those people considering their longevity vs a more established company like Meta. It may not matter to all investors, but the fact that it will matter to some makes it a factor in the total valuation.
Companies are now building the agentic layer, the agentic layer eats tokens. Everything you do every process will have tokens eaten inbetween.
Your HR Request? AI Tokens. Everything.
I'm lost on how you can be snarky while others already are loosing their jobs because of Anthropic/OpenAI
Job displacement is real, but based on real world usage it would owe just as much to Grok, Gemini, DeepSeek, Kimi, and whatever else that is close to frontier, but cheaper.
Sure that argument is a lot stronger. But the market might be big enough for Gemini, Anthropic and OpenAI.
Grok is a lot worse then Frontier and still is owned by a company for very little trust.
The chinese model are intersting, they do leverage Frontiermodels to train, this might be a moat for a while.
If in a couple years they're losing their jobs because of Anthropic/OpenAI/10+ other enterprise token resellers using open models then their value proposition is much weaker even if people are still losing jobs.
If you have in every single industry AI tokens, it will replace wages. In USA alone thats 15 Trillion. If its just 10% the USA market alone are 1.5T without the value added.
[1] Say >10% of people of employable age suddenly becomes superfluous with not much prospect of finding new jobs (since AI eats those too).
My company is building an agentic layer in its product, google and the other hyperscalers do that too.
I already want to get rid of one person in my team because he was slow before but was able to contribute something, now I want to have his position as AI tokens.
No i don't say that 10% of the entire USA market is gonna go to anthropic.
I said what the market overall could look like. USA is not the only country out there.
Why has Walmart such a high evaluation despite them only being in USA?
Why is Apple at 5 Trillion? They only make Laptops and Smartphones, everyone else is doing this too.
Why is Space-X 1.8 Trillion? Because of 10 Million Starlink customers?
I think AI is a disruptive technology.
But no one knows if there is a ceiling or progress might slow down massivly.
Is warning people so wrong if you interpolate the current progress and just look ahead a few years? Might just be as stupid as some North Korean/Russian hacker throwing some abliberated model against some computer system and having some cascading effect on water or energy grid.
For plenty of people AI already took their jobs, jobs they liked and enjoyed doing.
Simple as. I hope this helps.
potential buyers are discussing about a $1.2 trillion to $1.3 trillion valuation range for the company, according to people familiar with the matter. Some are weighing a value as low as $1.1 trillion
AS LOW AS?! This wording has to be intentional... Because I would use "as high as", myself.
As a privately held company, it functions under different dynamics that in the environment we’re seeing feels better to stay private for longer.