Its not subsidized, in fact, they probably have very healthy margins on Claude Code.

elzbardico an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah. If you ignore the negligible fact that some investor may want a return on all that money that is going into capex I am pretty sure you can, Enron style, get to the conclusion that any of those companies have “healthy” margins.

▲

phi-go 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why do you think that?

▲

johndough 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

DeepSeek had a theoretical profit margin of 545 % [1] with much inferior GPUs at 1/60th the API price.

Anthropic's Opus 4.6 is a bit bigger, but they'd have to be insanely incompetent to not make a profit on inference.

[1] https://github.com/deepseek-ai/open-infra-index/blob/main/20...

	▲	computerex 5 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		American labs trained in a different way than the Chinese labs. They might be making profit on inference but they are burning money otherwise.
	▲	DANmode 30 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> they'd have to be insanely incompetent to not make a profit on inference. Are you aware of how many years Amazon didn’t turn a profit? Not agreeing with the tactic - just…are you aware of it?

▲

noosphr 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Because if you don't then current valuations are a bublle propped inflated by burning a mountain of cash.

	▲	falcor84 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That's not how valuations work. A company's valuation is typically based on an NPV (net present value) calculation, which is a power series of its time-discounted future cash flows. Depending on the company's strategy, it's often rational for it to not be profitable for quite a long while, as long as it can give investors the expectation of significant profitability down the line. Having said that, I do think that there is an investment bubble in AI, but am just arguing that you're not looking at the right signal.
	▲	cies 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		And that's OpenAI's biz model? :)