But here is the thing: OpenAI’s revenue growth is slowing down dramatically. In 2023, they increased their revenue by 169% over 2022, and in 2024, they increased their revenue by 250% over 2023. In 2025, they are set to increase revenue by only 56% over 2024.
They are set to increase revenue by 3-4x in 2025.[0] So already, this article is based on false data.
Further more, losing $8b in the first half to buy GPUs isn't a big deal when you're growing 3-4x and there are investors lining up to give you money.
The rest of the article is mostly exaggerated AI doomer opinions that are often dispelled here on HN news comment section. For example, the author cites the MIT AI report snippet that says 95% of companies are failing at agentic AI. But the actual report is far more positive on AI's impact in the workforce.[1]
These doomer articles always fail to grasp two things:
1. Major Silicon Valley companies have always lost a huge amount of money before becoming profitable. OpenAI is just the next and at a bigger scale (because tech is far bigger in 2025 than before). Despite countless examples of tech companies losing a lot of money early on to becoming hugely profitable later, people still get hung up on the fact that OpenAI isn't profitable in 2025.
2. They always think that AI is as good as it gets now with little to no improvements coming. But we're still on an exponential curve.[2]
I don’t think Sam Altman thinks (2) is true, in fact it seems all the AI insiders are starting to signal that neither 1 or 2 will happen, why is it only outsiders saying this now?
Also the article, as all doomer articles I read do, address your points directly.
aurareturn•1h ago
Further more, losing $8b in the first half to buy GPUs isn't a big deal when you're growing 3-4x and there are investors lining up to give you money.
The rest of the article is mostly exaggerated AI doomer opinions that are often dispelled here on HN news comment section. For example, the author cites the MIT AI report snippet that says 95% of companies are failing at agentic AI. But the actual report is far more positive on AI's impact in the workforce.[1]
These doomer articles always fail to grasp two things:
1. Major Silicon Valley companies have always lost a huge amount of money before becoming profitable. OpenAI is just the next and at a bigger scale (because tech is far bigger in 2025 than before). Despite countless examples of tech companies losing a lot of money early on to becoming hugely profitable later, people still get hung up on the fact that OpenAI isn't profitable in 2025.
2. They always think that AI is as good as it gets now with little to no improvements coming. But we're still on an exponential curve.[2]
[0]https://finance.yahoo.com/news/openai-cfo-we-will-more-than-...
[1]https://mlq.ai/media/quarterly_decks/v0.1_State_of_AI_in_Bus...
[2]https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-com...
techblueberry•1h ago
Also the article, as all doomer articles I read do, address your points directly.