Market debut of AI company behind Claude chatbot will be one of largest in US history, a test of its financial viability

Anthropic has publicly filed for a stock market listing, one of the largest debuts in history. The company’s float on the US market is likely to be a high-water mark in the multitrillion-dollar AI boom and a test of its financial viability.

Analysts and investors have valued the San Francisco-based company, founded in 2021, at more than $1.5tn. The company, which will will list under the symbol ANT, confidentially filed with US financial regulators for an initial public offering in June.

  • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    154
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    The big companies have to IPO to transfer all this investor debt to mutual funds and retirement funds before it goes crash. Can’t be them on the hook for this when it pops.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      5 days ago

      Luckily S&P is blocking some of these shenanigans by not allowing inclusion into the S&P500 for companies that are not profitable even if they become publicly listed. This includes all of the AI only companies.

    • mrmacduggan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      5 days ago

      And if the debt is in the retirement funds, it’s a guarantee that the government will bail it out because they’re holding old people hostage. Yuck.

      • moustachio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Let the retirement funds crash. Maybe it’ll finally teach them not to trust crime-riddled, unregulated Wall Street with their futures.

      • green_goglin@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 days ago

        Fed can’t bailout shit with inflation running as hot as it already is (they’re already fudging the numbers to keep Social Security payments down). Dumping the bag onto retirement accounts (mutual funds, ETFs, etc.) is the bailout.

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Yeah. They haven’t contributed nearly as much as my old ass. What gives them the right?!

        • nastronot@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 days ago

          Coming out here all like “oh I just want what you had” and “why are things worse” and shit like “social security will be insolvent for me” like a bunch of whining hippies.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Exactly.

      We should have let the market crash years ago, so we could begin building something more sustainable in its place.

      Instead, it’s what, tripled in size more or less? The fall is only going to be that much harder as a result…

  • dephyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    5 days ago

    Company that has lost $125,000,000,000 in 6 years think it’s worth $1,500,000,000,000.

    What a time to be alive.

    • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      As someone with an economics-heavy business degree, I have said this since my intro to economics course. The fact that there are “schools”, and that some mainstream theories last only for years, not even decades, and that all governments who come in will “try” a “recipe” to see what works, is telling enough. The “laws” of economics are “kinda”, “usually”, “generally”, and above all “conditional”. There are a few things that are almost laws, like the fact that humanity is driven by the seven cardinal sins of which most can be translated into economic characteristics, and cycles (which we are hell bent in forgetting every time we are at a crest).

      I’m thermodynamic’s bitch. That shit is. You can’t cheat them laws.

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        The fact that the seven cardinal sins have officially been codified as a principle of economics is… telling…

        What are the primary drivers of humanity? Lust, greed, envy, gluttony, sloth, wrath, and pride.

        “Now how can we exploit that to extract more profit” is a question only a sociopath would ask. It explains so much about industry today though, especially marketing and yes, social media.

    • 0x0@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      And gambling, let’s not forget the casinos and lottery raffles

      • abc@suppo.fi
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        The kind of gambling where the biggest losers are the ones who are not participating, and they keep whining that the winners should give them something too.

        • 0x0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 days ago

          Ah yes, the self acclaimed winner in the wild.

          Big toes youve got there, winning!

          • abc@suppo.fi
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            I’m doing quite ok, actually. Most probably better than 99% of the people commenting here in just about every way possible.

            I’m not really a gambling man, though.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Astrology has more reality than economics does. At least the movements and positions of the planets is something real.

      People used to navigate by it, plant and harvest by it, nomads would migrate by the movements of the stars.

      Economics is just… “How much confirmation bias can we use to rationalize conclusions we’ve already determined in advance, in order to convince governments and investors to give us money that doesn’t even exist?” and “How can we frame these numbers to keep people from rioting?”

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        At least the movements and positions of the planets is something real.

        Yes but being sad because mercury is in gatorade or whatever isn’t “real”, it’s literally prescribed to you by someone who says that when planets do X then your mood or success in whatever endeavors must be Y and Z

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          If the only thing you’ve heard about astrology is the “newspaper horoscopes” that attempt to be prescriptive in that way, then I could see having that opinion.

          I would also argue that people who read those horoscopes and take them seriously, also do not understand astrology.

          My point is that “Mercury in retrograde” is a real phenomenon, unlike “self-regulating market” or “rational/ethical consumer,” or any of the other things economists use to try to justify deregulation, austerity, and “infinite growth.”

          My argument isn’t that Mercury retrograde has any effect on your mood. That’s a claim I didn’t make. But from the perspective of earth, there are times when Mercury appears to reverse its course. The other planets do it too. Hence, it is “more real than economics.”

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            There absolutely are real phenomenon in economics. There are none in astrology that have been proven.

            But from the perspective of earth, there are times when Mercury appears to reverse its course. The other planets do it too

            But that’s not astrology. Astrology is the art of giving it mysterious meanings. Mercury being in retrograde is an astronomical phenomenon.

            The problem with economics is that it’s essentially sociology and you obviously can’t make absolute laws about things that involve people. But I’ll give you two simple examples that absolutely have been proven time and time again:

            1. Induced demand - if you make something more available (cheaper), that in of itself is usually enough to make demand for it higher.

            2. Inelastic demand - if something is an absolute necessity then it becoming more expensive doesn’t reduce demand to 0 (healthcare, fuel).

            #2, incidentally, is one reason why markets will never be truly efficient and need to be regulated. The equilibrium of supply and demand can’t be what determines the price of healthcare, transportation, etc.

            Economics blows up when you try to make things absolute rules, or when you try to rationalize markets that have people with tons of money FOMOing bullshit based on marketing. Two problems come to mind:

            1. The P/E ratio of 10 is stated as a rule in investing, but there’s no reason that’s the exact right amount, it’s really just something that on average, people buying stocks find a sensible return rate because similar rates could be achieved elsewhere too.

            2. Conversely to the last point, people marketing IPOs for companies making zero profit will convince you that really horrible P/E is fine because those companies will take over the entire global market for whatever. See, that’d be true IFF there’s a market AND they remain the biggest player. Just because a P/E ratio of 10 being optimal isn’t an absolute law of the universe doesn’t mean a P/E ratio of 1000 is any good.

          • Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            As stated to you in a other comment. Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same. The only similarities they have is relying on the position of planets and celestial bodies. Astrology is pure pseudoscience.

            • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Seeing as economics is also a pseudoscience, I don’t see how that contradicts my point at all.

              I said the movements of the stars and planets as described by astrology is a real phenomenon. Unless you want to dispute that, you’re arguing against a strawman of your own construction.

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          No, astronomy is the modern science of measuring and studying outer space. It grew out of astrology in the same way that the modern science of chemistry grew out of alchemy.

          • Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same thing. Astrology has nothing to do with navigation or planting/harvesting cycles. The only similarities astrology has with any of that is the position of planets, but astrology is strictly a divinatory practice.

            • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              If you don’t see the inherent connection between those two things, then I don’t know what to tell you.

              If an ancient boat captain was consulting an ephemeris to determine their exact position, who do you think wrote/published the ephemeris?

              Long before written language was ever invented, who do you think was studying the stars and saying “now is the time to plant”?

              If that’s “divinatory” then so be it, but looking at it from a modern lens of how the term is commonly used today, is anachronistic. And it doesn’t change my original point anyway, because the movements of the stars are real, unlike the so-called “laws” of economics.

  • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 days ago

    How did they justify that valuation? All i could find in the article is what they EXPECT AI to do and they have a “rapidly growing customer base”?

    Nothing about how they plan on providing $1.5t of value, just “its AI its gonna cure cancer do you wanna get left behind?!?”

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    So the investors want to get rid of the risks in their books. Hopefully they find enough MAGAs to sell the shit to.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    5 days ago

    Greed and FOMO are going to drive a lot of investors to buy into the Anthropic IPO just like it did SpaceX. That seems to be what’s driving the market these days. Admittedly, that’s somehow been much more sustainable than I ever thought possible, and as a result I’ve missed out on some significant gains, but that’s because I know for certain this can’t go on forever. Eventually someone’s going to be left holding the bag.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 days ago

    I get it. I found an old rock in a ditch that has a unique shape that I like. I value it at around 150 million dollars. BOOM! Economy solved!

  • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    … fuck that lol.

    This is going to be a problem when all of our 401ks buy into it and we all end up being the bagholders

    • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      5 days ago

      I’ve been trying to move my retirement accounts into funds that are better insulated from an AI bubble pop, but it’s challenging. I mainly moved into funds based on international stocks and low- to mid-cap stocks. The high-cap stock funds are almost entirely AI-fueled companies right now. They’re making crazy returns, but I just don’t trust them.

      • llama@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 days ago

        Most etfs that focus on dividend yields have very little AI exposure because AI companies don’t make enough money and aren’t mature enough to issue dividends.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Those aren’t also going to get you an early retirement so you could start leeching off the working class sooner, dividend paying companies don’t usually grow much.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        There are sharia indexes that don’t contain the same mixture of top stocks. I think SpaceX is excluded from that one because of the defense contracting stuff they do.

  • nastronot@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    5 days ago

    Yeah well my IPO is valued at 2 bobillion and comes with a coupon for a free 3 piece meal.

    These cretins live in a reality that is out of our reach and generates negative consequences they never feel or are held accountable for.

    Money is fake. Meet your neighbors.

    • cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      Money is a shared delusion. It’s been fun. But it’s time to break the delusion and start asking ourselves what our money is actually for, what we actually need, and whether money is still the only way we can get those things.

  • PineRune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    5 days ago

    How soon do you think the U.S. government will be bailing out AI companies like they did so many other industries that were “too big to fail”? They’ll get our tax money one way or another.

  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    The headlines have finally started turning and calling it what it is: a bubble economy about to burst.

    They’ve finally started saying “these companies are overvalued with no real strategy or profitability, and the receipts are about to come due.”

    So what do the tech companies do in response? “Quick! Pump and dump! Pump and dump!”

    It’s a fucking ponzi scheme. How have we not learned this yet as a society?

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      I wonder who will be stupid enough to buy this burning stock. With the value based on fantasy, the gargantuan losses being real, the tangible value being close to zero (most of them don’t even own the data centers, they lease them) and a product that will probably never achieve what they promise, they will need a special kind of customer. Maybe they should do mailings to the people who bought Trumps’ crypto coins…

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        You’d think the people whose jobs it is to understand that would see through it. But if they’re approved for the IPO, then I think some funds will be forced by policy to buy