▲ | lelanthran 2 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
I actually wondered about this myself, so I asked Gemini with a long back and forth conversation. The takeaway from Gemini is that subscriptions do lose money on some subscribers, but it is expected that not all subscribers use up their full quota each month. This is true even for non-AI subscriptions since the beginning of the subscription model (i.e. magazines, gamepass, etc). The other surprising (to me, anyway) takeaway is that the AI providers have some margin on each token for PAYG users, and that VC money is not necessary for them to continue providing the service. The VC money is capital expenditure into infrastructure for training. Make of it what you will, but it seems to me that if they stop training they don't need the investments anymore. Of course, that sacrifices future potential for profitability today, so who knows? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | fl0id 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
That’s just a general explainer of subscription models. As of right now VC money is necessary for just existing. And they can never stop training or researching. They also constantly have to buy new gpus unless there’s at some point a plateau of ‘good enough’ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | malfist 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Why do you think Gemini is the authority on the internal costs of AI providers and their profit margins? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|