Yeah, it's a crazy number, but they got the AI business right, just like Google got internet marketing right 25 years ago, as long as they keep the momentum (and prices).

▲

kinnth 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Isn't the issue tho, that google launched at i dunno a 1bn market cap and grew as the internet grew.

what you're buying into here is a company that is already large on the idea of growth over the next 10 years.

Modern IPO's just reek of investors cashing out

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> google launched at i dunno a 1bn market cap and grew as the internet grew

Google closed its first trading day "worth more than $25 billion" [1] with $1.5bn revenues, up 234% from 2002's $440mm [2]. That's a 16x revenue multiple, 0.07 growth adjusted [3].

On a similar revenue multiple, Anthropic's $16.3bn half-year earnings are worth $543 billion. Adjust for Anthropic's 1,400% YoY growth and you're well over $3 trillion.

Obviously, it's a lot harder to grow at a thousand percent from a $16bn baseline versus a few billion. But purely on a multiple basis, Anthropic is in a similar ballpark as Google.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/19/technology/shares-of-goog...

[2] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312504...

[3] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pegratio.asp

▲

extraextra 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

If only it was that simple, to switch multiples around between random companies and come up with valuations

Google was profitable, free cash flow positive and had no debts basically

Anthropic is burning money by the millisecond, no profits, free cash flow negative and has lots of debts & commitments

▲

runako 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

As another check, SpaceX is trading at ~62x sales with a growth rate in the 30% range. Assigning the same sales multiple puts Anthropic at ~$2T market cap. Add in a factor for much faster growth (and non-GAAP profitability) and $3T is a really easy place to end up.

	▲	extraextra 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, you can throw any numbers around, if you wish to get any valuation you want. In reality, a valuation based on revenue (sales) is bonkers to begin with, but even worse when you consider that Anthropic has so much debt that it doesn't have positive equity value, it's in a deficit ("When liabilities attached to an asset exceed its value, the difference is called a deficit and the asset is informally said to be "underwater" or "upside-down""). At least SpaceX has more assets than liabilities.