Remix.run Logo
ketzo 3 hours ago

$19B -> $30B annualized revenue in a month?

Feels like the lede is buried here!

strongpigeon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

All of big tech (except Google obviously) is pushing hard for Claude Code internally. I’m talking “you all have unlimited tokens and we’re going to have a leaderboard of who used the most” kind of push.

causal 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

"we’re going to have a leaderboard of who used the most"

Yeah I've seen stuff like that and it's a bit bewildering for me. Feels a bit like AWS is new and we're competing to see who can deploy the most EC2 instances.

9cb14c1ec0 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also, very very recently they said in a court filing that their lifetime revenue was "at least" 5 billion. Which is it?

dauhak 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Their disclosed run rate was 14bn around the time of those filings IIRC, they started showing meaningful revenue around start of 2025, so if you just linearly extrapolate up that would give you ~7bn-ish actual revenue over that period. The more the growth is weighted towards the last few months the more that number goes down

So I don't think those numbers are really in tension at all

tabbott 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If your revenue doubles every month, then in the first month where you make $2.5B, your total lifetime revenue has been $5B ($2.5B this month, $1.25B the month before, etc. is a simple geometric series). But your current revenue run rate for the next year will be $2.5B x 12 = $30B.

They're not quite growing that fast, but there's nothing inherently inconsistent between these claims... as long as the growth curve is crazy.

kdkl 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The reality is

1) It's in their interest to distort numbers and frame things that make them look good - e.g. using 'run-rate' 2) The numbers are not audited and we have no idea re. the manner in which they are recognising revenue - this can affect the true compounding rate of growth in revenues

signatoremo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The numbers are certainly audited by their investors. Anthropic isn't foreign to PR talk, but investors know what to look for in their book. They aren't stupid unlike how they are viewed on HN.

There are more investment money than Anthropic need. They can pick and choose.

kdkl 2 hours ago | parent [-]

"The numbers are certainly audited by their investors."

Hahaha.

Mate nobody cares about that nor trusts it. Everyone is waiting in anticipation for the S-1 filing.

aurareturn 18 minutes ago | parent [-]

I do, and I do trust the numbers. I doubt Anthropic is pursuing fraud given that they already don't have enough compute to serve demand. What is the point of lying to the public, investors and risk going to jail?

xtacy 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Curious - what’s this court filing?

9cb14c1ec0 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Too lazy to pull up a url, but it was a filing by Anthropic's CFO in the Anthropic v Department of War case.

oidar 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Doesn't that beat openai in revenue?

kdkl 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

ai-x 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But But But "AI is a bubble!!!!!!"

At what point would bubble-callers admit that they were completely wrong?

baron816 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think you can argue that AI is going to explode and take over the economy, and it’s still a bubble.

I think one possible route is that cloud capacity just becomes totally commoditized and none of the hyperscalers will be able to extract the kinds of profit margins that would allow them to make a good return on their investment (model makers will fall victim to this too). Ultimately, what may happen is that market competition for everything explodes since AI and robots can do all the work, prices for everything (goods, services, assets) collapses, and no one is really any richer than anyone else.

zozbot234 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Even if the AI frontier becomes "totally commoditized" it will still be reliant on a scarce factor, namely leading-edge chips. Chipmakers will ultimately capture that value, because competing it away would require expanding the industry and that's a very slow process involving billion-dollar expenses planned far in advance (multiple years, and that lead time can only expand further as the required scale gets even larger).

baron816 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You don’t think open AI models will eventually be able to design and build chips and fabs and all their components?

kdkl 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Except you're neglecting the fact that LLMs can become more efficient.

The magical thing about software is that efficiency gains can come pretty quickly relative to other industries.

MarsIronPI 2 hours ago | parent [-]

We're already seeing this with Qwen 3.5 and Gemma 4. They're better than GPT-3.5 and they run on smartphones and old laptops.

mrcwinn 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They won’t. They’ll just casually fade away from prior statements. Just like all the software engineers whose first take was that it’s just autocomplete.