The S-1 isn't out yet so this isn't the formal "road show" for the IPO. Apparently meeting with investors before filing is called "testing the waters." But it seems unlikely that the numbers...
The S-1 isn't out yet so this isn't the formal "road show" for the IPO. Apparently meeting with investors before filing is called "testing the waters." But it seems unlikely that the numbers they're giving to investors would be much different from the numbers that show up in the S-1.
I updated my chart to have a new tab for quarterly revenue. Also, there's a tab comparing the actual quarterly numbers to estimates based on previously leaked run rates. Looks pretty close! (The chart is AI-generated.)
So, despite some skepticism from cynics, the leaked run rates don't seem to have been misleading after all? Everything's consistent.
Anthropic executives told a roomful of investors on Wednesday that the company’s revenue for the third quarter jumped about 45 percent from the prior quarter to $16.8 billion, as it pursues what may become the largest-ever initial public offering, two people with knowledge of the company’s presentation said.
[...]
In the meeting with potential investors at its headquarters, Anthropic sought to generate enthusiasm for the upcoming deal. Revenue was up from $11.6 billion in the second quarter. The company also said it was profitable after making certain adjustments, which is not a bottom-line number. And it said its gross margin, or revenue minus direct costs associated with generating that revenue, was 85 percent after making certain adjustments.
[...]
Anthropic, which filed to go public in June, has not yet made its prospectus — which lays out its financial performance — public. Wednesday was the first official opportunity for potential I.P.O. investors to get a glimpse into the numbers, which may give insight into the health of the broader A.I. industry and will help determine the valuation Anthropic will get in its listing.
Also, Simon Willison comments on a quote from the Financial Times:
Also, Simon Willison comments on a quote from the Financial Times:
Anthropic told investors on Wednesday distillation accounted for 5 per cent to 7 per cent of revenue and that they had cut it back “materially” in the third quarter of the year, said four people with direct knowledge of the matter.
Napkin maths says that if distillation was 5% of their Q2 revenue (before they cut it back in Q3) then unnamed "other labs" spent over half a billion dollars distilling Anthropic's models in that quarter!
Currently it seems like the subscription plans for Claude are a better deal than the api pricing for open models, but this suggests they are heavily subsidised. It’s a common tech accounting trick...
Currently it seems like the subscription plans for Claude are a better deal than the api pricing for open models, but this suggests they are heavily subsidised.
It’s a common tech accounting trick to sell $10 notes for $5 and report massive growth, but when they have to actually make a profit they will be competing with the fact Chinese models do mostly the same thing for little more than the cost to run them.
The S-1 isn't out yet so this isn't the formal "road show" for the IPO. Apparently meeting with investors before filing is called "testing the waters." But it seems unlikely that the numbers they're giving to investors would be much different from the numbers that show up in the S-1.
I updated my chart to have a new tab for quarterly revenue. Also, there's a tab comparing the actual quarterly numbers to estimates based on previously leaked run rates. Looks pretty close! (The chart is AI-generated.)
So, despite some skepticism from cynics, the leaked run rates don't seem to have been misleading after all? Everything's consistent.
From the article:
[...]
[...]
Also, Simon Willison comments on a quote from the Financial Times:
Currently it seems like the subscription plans for Claude are a better deal than the api pricing for open models, but this suggests they are heavily subsidised.
It’s a common tech accounting trick to sell $10 notes for $5 and report massive growth, but when they have to actually make a profit they will be competing with the fact Chinese models do mostly the same thing for little more than the cost to run them.