Jason argues OpenAI's $150B+ valuation is stretched given it loses $5B/year on $3.5B in revenue, implying a ~40-50x price-to-sales multiple that is hard to justify given competition.
They're losing $5 billion a year, they're making $3.5 billion, they put this thing at $150 billion, it's 40 times, 50 times revenue. To fill in that valuation on a price-to-sales basis, you know, it's kind of crazy.” ⚑
Mark Cuban argues OpenAI's aggressive investor restrictions and founder exodus reflect fear and poor character, and that Google (Gemini), Meta (open source), and others are credible competitors meaning OpenAI is far from a guaranteed winner.
There is no, you know, there's nothing that says that OpenAI is going to win, nothing at all. And so I don't feel bad about what they're doing. And to me, it tells me they're more scared than anything by trying to restrict what people are” ⚑
Sacks is skeptical of OpenAI, highlighting its shift from nonprofit to aggressive for-profit, restricting investors from backing competitors, and Sam Altman taking compensation after saying he wouldn't — suggesting the company is operating on false pretenses.
They originally started that enterprise with $50 million or so from Elon. It was a nonprofit. Then they became a for-profit. Now there's a report saying that they're telling investors in this round that they can't invest in any other AI” ⚑