> Are investors subsidizing the technology? There's upfront build out, but Anthropic is profitable and I believe the big labs are profitable on inference.

That's the thing about a bubble though. It's not about if things are profitable; it's if they will produce the profit in the future to support the current stock price.

Companies in 2000 were profitable and to this day still are (ex. Cisco [1] which despite only 26 years of inflation only reached it's dot-com stock price this year).

IIUC, Anthropic is $1T valuation on $10B revenue and $0.5B profit.

Google's has $4T valuation on $400B revenue and $100B profit. Which (dividing by 4 to get same valuation as Anthrophic) is $100B revenue and $25B profit.

IIUC, World GDP is ~$100T so Anthrophic "just" needs to get 0.1% of all economic activity to depend on them. Which to me actually seems like a tall order. Sure Google does more than that but Google spent ~30 years getting into that position.

So, Anthrophic 1/10 the required revenue despite every company in America pushing as hard as possible to use AI. What will it take for them to get it?

[1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=cisco+stock&oq=cisco+stock

> So, Anthrophic 1/10 the required revenue despite every company in America pushing as hard as possible to use AI. What will it take for them to get it?

Anthropic revenue (annualized):

February 2026 $14 billion,

April 2026 $30 billion

May 2026 $47 billion

The market prices future revenue. What other company doubles revenue every few months? Where does it stop is the question. You need a few more doublings and things start making sense.