Thread

1. trilogic · 1790671549 · focus · HN ↗

   What blow my mind is the fact that 20/30 dollar subscription is not enough to sustain the business? Pushing for 200 dollars subscription to keep afloat with it. If like claimed there are 1 billion users and 10% do the 30usd/month means 1 dollar/day x 100 million. How is that not enough to maintain this prices? Then you have all the inside business happening (users data, targeted ads, worldwide insights and intelligence, even monopoly of narrative) which would be your real passive income profit.

   Users dont use all the time the service so they compensate each-other with power users. So for now getting from users at least 36B/year making an estimate evaluation of 360B (other incomes included, evaluation goes up to near a trillion). Be happy team you are the only one that you made it, but is enough one mistake in this house of cards. Again struggling to understand this logic even though you have access to the best intelligence in the world...

   1. alpineman · 1790671896 · focus · HN ↗

      That's just not enough dollar volume to pay for all the inference, data center buildout, training, salary costs to compete with Meta etc etc. They also need to pay for the inference of the 98% of users who don't pay anything but use the models, that's essentially a marketing cost.

      1. thimabi · 1790683009 · focus · HN ↗

         But Meta until very recently offered its services mostly for free, on a gigantic scale, paid for by ads. Now OpenAI has subscription revenue, API revenue, and ads revenue too. The fact that OpenAI isn’t financially sustainable makes me think it hasn’t really mastered its business yet.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.