[pickledoyster]

This is based on HSBC's model, which assumes some incredible numbers, such as: > user numbers on an S-curve that by 2030 reaches 3bn, “equivalent to 44 per cent of the world’s adult population” ex China.

Unfounded statements (outside of language tasks, fwiw), such as: >LLM subscriptions will become “as ubiquitous and useful as Microsoft 365”, HSBC says.

As well as this bold claim about OAI's potential to double the conversion rate: >It models that by 2030, 10 per cent of OpenAI users will be paying customers, versus an estimated 5 per cent currently.

Does not include a major player in its market share analysis at all: >Google is excluded entirely

And, still, it suggests that: > OpenAI is expected to still be subsidising its users well into next decade

Fascinating.

[saxenaabhi]

Still, it's only 40bn per year divided by 3b so equal to around 15$/person/year

Isn't that super cheap? Just think of the revolutionary impact it would have on education, health, work etc.

I don't understand how anyone can call it a bubble.

[bparsons]

I think the question is whether people are willing to pay for an LLM when there are equivalent or good-enough free competitors available.

One could argue that LLMs will change the world, but that doesn't guarantee that LLM companies will capture any of that value.

The additional rub is that the paying power users are arguably costing these companies more money than the free users.

[monooso]

> I don't understand how anyone can call it a bubble.

Perhaps because in this scenario, even after (only) an additional $40bn a year for the next 5 years, OpenAI will still be losing money.

[killingtime74]

That's what you get when you get an intern to write a research report. Or the intern getting an AI to do it

[cebert]

I wonder if the intern uses ChatGPT.