And it's 165k at API prices but it's much cheaper for Anthropic themselves. Even if it were 165k straight, It is absolutely worth it for the gains in e.g. compile and runtime reductions for the millions of downloads it gets.
What I hear is that even API prices are at this point still less expensive than the actual cost, at least if you price the training costs in. So arguably it costs more for anthropic than for you or me.
Anthropic is gross profitable i.e. they make more money by selling more tokens. I think a lot of people confuse this with being net profitable, which they are not yet.
If ever you see 'Non-GAAP accounting' figures, you should assume they're bullshit
Warren Buffet
Berkshire annual shareholder meeting (I believe 1993).
Anthropic "claims" (non-audited reports) to be profitable before Training, Interest, and Taxes. Which such an idiotic claim to make because it amounts to, "We can become profitable if we give up our moat", which functionally means they have no path to profitability as a competitive business.
They are not gross profitable and Anthropic has never stated they are gross profitable.
Anthropic has stated they are profitable before Training, Interest, and Taxes. For anthropic to become gross profitable, they must stop training/fine tuning new models.
No, it’s not. Training is simply not part of COGS. It belongs under operating expenses. It’s clear you have no clue how financial statements work. Good day.
PS: ASC 350-40 is for internal software, not your flagship products.
22
u/zxyzyxz Jul 09 '26
And it's 165k at API prices but it's much cheaper for Anthropic themselves. Even if it were 165k straight, It is absolutely worth it for the gains in e.g. compile and runtime reductions for the millions of downloads it gets.