points by chairmansteve 3 days ago | 0 comments
Good point. Although they also need to make a profit. To justify an eventual PE ratio of 25 and a current valuation of $1 trillion they need to make an annual profit $40 billion. And then lets assume $40 billion in other expenses. So they need revenue of $50 + $40 + $40 = $130 billion revenue annually.
But if you buy them today at a $1 trillion valuation, and they only make $40 billion in annual profit, your investment will go nowhere. They need to be growing profits at 20% per annum to justify a PE OF 25.
And then you have the competition problem. The cheap open weight models are good enough for many (most?) tasks.
And then you have the problem that LLMs may not be that useful outside of programming, customer support and law (and doing homework).
[–] majky538 2 days ago
[–] abletonlive 3 days ago
We have examples today of companies that don't need to justify an eventual PE ratio of 25 so why would this be a thing all the sudden? I think you all are misunderstanding vague notions of market fundamentals as some kind of rules by which the market works.
Last week I build my new project on free plan medium Luna OpenAI, totally fine.
A lot of new SaaS companies is just integrating AI into their products. Would be nice to follow this if they increase prices / how they are doing.
Not sure how big part of customers are random human coders / big tech / small-medium SaaS companies...
From S-1, some use-cases in many companies doesn't look convincingly.