you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (11 children)

they lost $72 billion in Q3 despite revenue going up a lot.

Despite? More like because. If compute is subsidized, every extra compute adds to the loss.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    72 billion was a paper loss. 8 billion loss is still a lot though!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Can you elaborate on that a bit more, I figured thats what this was trying to say

    The loss, up from $13 billion a year earlier, was driven by $72 billion in accounting charges tied to changes in the value of financial instruments Anthropic issued to raise money, the ​report said, citing a draft prospectus for its IPO.

    But I didn't really understand it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 day ago

    Pre-IPO investors fund the company but it isnt like they give all the money upfront. They do it in pieces and can increase or decrease as targets are reached, failed, or pivoted. This keeps the investors less likely to lose money. As debts and losses are shown the value of the company dropped and how much money is on tap for the future decreases. In this case 72B of funding was "lost". This is paper money because they only had it on paper they didnt have the gold in hand.

    Essentially their potential value to their current investors dropped 72B.

    The reported net loss is real as they used more money than they made.

    Neither factor is going to bankrupt or close the company considering they still have a bunch on hand and their investors still seem to think theres a possibility of profit (just less than before).

    That's my non-expert understanding anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago*

    It's not 72 billion dollars lost related to the business.

    The money didn't exist and wasn't spent.

    It's not clear what the instrument was exactly (I would need to look it up myself, not an accountant). But there are a range of charges that aren't actually related to profitability of a business. Value of instruments could be tied to a capital raise earlier. EG if they promised a percent of the company as part of a raise, and Anthropic is worth a lot more now. Their liability increases (the percent they owe is worth more now) and they book as a loss.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    The paper loss is still critically important though.

    "Oh don't worry about that 64 billion. That's just something or other the accountants dreamed up. You know what those buzz-harshing assholes are like."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    It's not as important as you might think. Counter intuitively it's tied to success as a risky start up. Or arguably they should have got better terms during one of their raises - but hindsight and all that.

    For the record I wouldn't by them for 1.5 trillion dollars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    Its important to the people deciding whether to give them more money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 21 hours ago (2 children)

    As a selling point that they can deliver incredible ROI?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 17 hours ago (1 child)

    Well, no. In this case it's an indicator that their funding model has costs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 16 hours ago

    They do a raise and give an investor 10% of the company (or more accurately a claim), the company receives 10 billion dollars (valuing the company at 100 billion)

    A year later the company is worth 1 trillion dollars. That investor's claim is now worth 100 billion dollars. And then the 90 billion is booked as a liability and so a loss. If they IPO, that 10% gets converted to shares. The liability is gone.

    Good for the investor. The startup needed the cash, so good for them. I'm sure they aren't crying that their company is valued at a trillion dollars.

    Should it be worth that much? That's different.

  • source
  • parent