zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. manque+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-01-22 07:57:12
I don't have any qualified source and this metric would be likely be quite confidential even internally.

It is just an educated guess factoring costs of running similar/comparable models to 4o or 4o-mini per token, and how azure commitments work with OpenAI models[2], also knowing that Plus subscriptions are probably more profitable[1] than API calls.

It would be hard for even OpenAI to know with any certainty because they are not paying for Azure credits like a normal company. The costs are deeply intertwined with Azure and would be hard to split given the nature of the MS relationship[3]

----

[1] This is from experience of running LibreChat using 4o versus ChatGPT Plus for ~200 users, subscriptions should quite profitable than raw API by a order of 3 to 4x, of course different types of users and adoption levels will be there my sample while not small is not likely representative of their typical user base.

[2] MS has less incentive to subsidize than say OpenAI themselves

[3] Azure is quite profitable in the aggregate, while possibly subsidizing OpenAI APIs, any such subsidy has not shown up meaningfully in Microsoft financial reports.

replies(1): >>throwa+4a3
2. throwa+4a3[view] [source] 2025-01-23 09:38:56
>>manque+(OP)
Sam Altman posted to Twitter:

    > Insane thing: we are currently losing money on OpenAI pro subscriptions! people use it much more than we expected.
Ref: https://techstartups.com/2025/01/06/openai-is-losing-money-o...
replies(1): >>akimbo+qx3
◧◩
3. akimbo+qx3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-23 13:37:03
>>throwa+4a3
Next he will tell us how open OpenAI is
[go to top]