Breaking: bad news for three of the biggest IPOs in history
We recorded 8 claims from this post. 4 were checked against evidence. 4 can’t be checked. 5 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (8)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Causal claim
“One big reason why Anthropic is having a blowout quarter (aside from the massive one time subsidy that they got from SpaceX) is that companies have been “tokenmaxxing” for the last few months, encouraging employees to use GenAI as much possible, without much regard to payoff.”
Our reading: A major reason for Anthropic's blowout quarter, besides a one-time SpaceX subsidy, is companies tokenmaxxing: pushing employees to use GenAI as much as possible without much regard to payoff.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The filing covers a broader period than the quarter-to-date claim.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Causal claim
“That means lots of short-term revenue to Anthropic and OpenAI, but it never seemed like a sustainable idea to me:”
Our reading: Tokenmaxxing means lots of short-term revenue for Anthropic and OpenAI, though it never seemed to Marcus like a sustainable idea.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Ramp's adoption and spending figures do not isolate tokenmaxxing's revenue contribution to each provider [e1].
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Tokenmaxxing is stupid.”
Our reading: Tokenmaxxing is stupid.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“A month later, it already looks like the moment has passed; tokenmaxxing may have jacked up Anthropic’s second quarter, but it looks like it won’t last.”
Our reading: The tokenmaxxing trend that may have boosted Anthropic's second quarter already seems to have passed and probably will not last.
No horizon
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Causal claim
“which means less revenue for Anthropic and others. Or lower prices and even more challenges in being profitable.”
Our reading: The reported enterprise swing away from tokenmaxxing means less revenue for Anthropic and others, or else lower prices and even more challenges in being profitable.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The report does not connect customer usage changes to attributable financial effects at Anthropic or other providers [e1].
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“Consistent with the Axios quote, and the Uber concern’s I expressed a couple days ago, I am seeing more and more reports online like this:”
Our reading: Marcus is seeing more and more online reports like the quoted one, about companies burning money on tokens without significant ROI.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The item provides no comparable observation windows or complete record of Marcus's encounters [e1].
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“The second sentence— “Tokens got burned for millions of dollars without any real significant ROI to show for it” – might well turn out to be the epitaph for an era.”
Our reading: The current era of AI spending may well be remembered as one in which millions of dollars of tokens were burned without significant ROI.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Conditional forecast
“And it could get worse, if tokenmaxxing is indeed a fad whose time has already begun to pass.”
Our reading: If tokenmaxxing is indeed a fad whose time has already begun to pass, the poor AI-return picture in the projections he cites, and its possible fallout for the economy, could get worse.
No horizon
Only if: if tokenmaxxing is indeed a fad whose time has already begun to pass
Held from this post (5)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: There will be bailouts.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently