Comment by timr
2 days ago
> Anthropic is renting GPUs and calling it technology.
While you can imitate the style of my response by ignoring all of the technical details, you've still ignored all of the details.
WeWork was not a technology company. Anthropic is. You even admit it, but you want to hide your actual argument ("the technology is a commodity") behind an irrelevant rhetorical flourish.
It's fine to argue that Anthropic's business is bad. You don't need to make a ridiculous, unsuitable metaphor on top of it.
But "Anthropic is a technology company" isn't enough to claim that their IPO valuation is reasonable.
The problem with WeWork's IPO wasn't that they aren't a tech company. It's that they didn't have a good enough business model.
AFAICT, the only one who cares about whether Anthropic, or WeWork, is a technology company, is you.
I didn't claim the valuation is reasonable. I said that the comparison with WeWork is ridiculous.
> The problem with WeWork's IPO wasn't that they aren't a tech company. It's that they didn't have a good enough business model.
No, they had a fine business model - there are many other companies using it today (including WeWork). It just wasn't worth a technology company multiple.
(Let's also not forget the mountain of crazy things - such as the founder leasing his own properties to the company at sweetheart rates - in the WeWork S1, that actually torpedoed the offering. Anthropic's listing is nothing like WeWork. Nothing. Not even remotely.)