紧急播客：Anthropic的S-1 IPO文件——与Dan Primack对谈

好了，Anthropic的S-1文件已经出来了，所以是时候进行紧急快速反应了，我们请来了最合适的嘉宾来聊这个。

Well, the Anthropic S-1 is here, so it's time for an emergency rapid reaction, and we're joined by the perfect guest to do it.

丹·普里马克来了。

Dan Primack is here.

他是Axios的商业编辑，也是Pro Rata新闻通讯的作者。

He's the business editor at Axios and the author of the Pro Rata newsletter.

丹，很高兴见到你。

Dan, it's great to see you.

欢迎来到节目。

Welcome to the show.

谢谢邀请。

Thanks for having me.

今天真是忙。

Busy day.

确实很忙，丹。

Definitely a busy day, Dan.

真的很感谢你抽出时间。

Really appreciate your time.

你在硅谷银行倒闭这样的重大突发财经新闻中加入了我们。

You have joined us in the middle of crazy breaking financial news, including the dissolution of Silicon Valley Bank.

希望这件事不会导致经济灾难，我觉得这是合适的开场。

Hopefully, this is an event that doesn't lead to economic catastrophe, and I think that's the right place to start.

人们之前说科技股乃至整个市场都取决于Anthropic的S-1文件中的数据，这份文件于东部时间10月26日周一早上9点发布。

People were saying that the tech trade and really the full market hinged on the numbers we were going to see from Anthropic's S-1 document, which dropped at 9:00 a.m. Eastern this morning on Monday, October 26th.

现在我们可以真正看到他们的收入、支出、每位员工的盈利能力、风险因素，所有细节。

So now we actually can see their revenue, their expenses, how much money they make per employee, the risk factors, the whole deal.

那么，看了这份文件之后，你觉得我们在这个问题上处于什么位置？

So after taking a look at the document, where do you think we stand on that question?

这个经济能撑得住吗？

Is this economy going to hold up?

会的。

It will be.

不过，我觉得问题还是在于这种循环关系，对吧？

Although, I think the circularity of it is still the issue, right?

你看Anthropic和SpaceX、博通等公司签的那些合同。

You look at the contracts in here that Anthropic has with SpaceX and Broadcom and all the rest of it.

这些公司之间的关联太紧密了。

All of these companies are so incredibly connected to one another.

我觉得那些担忧依然存在，但你看，我们从中得到的结果基本符合预期，对吧？

I think those concerns are still there, but look, what we got out of this is kind of what we expected, right?

之前财务数据就已经泄露了。

There'd already been leaked financials.

显然，收入在飞速增长。

Obviously, revenue is going through the roof.

Anthropic的开支也一样。

So is spend for Anthropic.

唯一没在这里面看到的是第三季度的数据，那些数据已经泄露了。

And the only thing we didn't get in here was the Q3 numbers, which have been leaked.

我猜在它真正上市之前，这些数字会出现在修订后的文件中。

My guess is before it actually goes public, those end up in an amended filing.

好的。

Okay.

那么从你目前看到的情况来看，这基本上是你预期中的那家公司吗？

And so from what you've seen so far, is this basically the company that you expected to see?

而且当你考虑IPO时，显然我们现在不知道他们打算筹集多少资金。

And when you think about the IPO, obviously we don't know how much they're raising right now.

所以这是一个关键问题。

So that's a key question.

我们真的不知道他们的估值会是多少。

We don't really know what their valuation's going to be.

人们猜测会是筹集100亿，估值200亿——抱歉，是2万亿——

People are assuming it's going to be 100 million raised at a 200 million-- Sorry, 2 trillion-

抱歉。

Sorry.

……以2万亿美元估值融资1000亿美元。

... 100 billion raised at a 2 trillion valuation.

根据你在文件里看到的内容，你觉得Anthropic有没有能力做到这一点？

Where do you think Anthropic stands on the ability to do that based on what you saw on the document?

嗯，我觉得它的能力并不是基于我在文件里看到的内容。

Well, I don't think its ability is based on what I saw on the document.

我觉得文件跟这个关系不大，甚至可以说基本无关，对吧？

I think the document is not irrelevant to that, but largely irrelevant to that, right?

我觉得它能拿到这笔钱，因为它想要，而且市场会满足它的要求，就像市场当初愿意给SpaceX四百多亿美元去买GPU一样。

I think it's going to be able to get that because that's what it wants, and the market is going to give it whatever it wants, just like the market was willing to give SpaceX 40-something billion dollars to buy GPUs today.

我觉得资本市场在AI故事上投入了很多，而Anthropic和OpenAI算是这个故事的头条。

I think the capital markets have a lot invested in the AI story, and Anthropic and OpenAI are kind of the headlines of that.

我觉得他们能拿到这笔钱。

I think they're going to be able to get it.

不过值得一提的是，我今天早上写了篇文章，说Anthropic的IPO，不管成功、失败还是介于两者之间，都会成为AI市场的一次公投。

Now, it's worth noting, I wrote this morning that I think the Anthropic IPO, its success or failure or something in between, is going to be a referendum on the AI market.

我觉得确实是这样，或者说在AI业务方面，虽然我不认为这一定公平，对吧？

I think that's true, or on the business of AI, although I don't think it's necessarily fair, right?

Anthropic是一家公司，这是一次发行。

Anthropic is a company, this is a offering.

如果估值略低于或略高于那个万亿，从大局来看并不是什么大问题。

If it comes in a little below that trillion or a little above, it's not that big a deal in the big picture.

好的。

Okay.

但你在你的通讯里还写了别的东西，我觉得我们应该聊聊，那就是这——你刚才提到，你认为市场会给Anthropic它想要的一切。

But you also wrote something else in your newsletter that I think we should talk about, which is that this is-- And so you mentioned just now that you think the market will give Anthropic whatever it wants.

我觉得钱是有的。

I think the money's there.

是的。

Yes.

我觉得钱是有的。

I think the money's there.

而且你有这么多大投资者，他们都非常——我不想说投入，但——可以说是象征性地投入——

And you've got so many big investors who are so, I hate to say invested, but- ... figuratively invested-

这个词用得好

It's a good word

——在这个行业和这个故事里。

... in this industry and in this story.

而且大家都知道，最终这些都会进入指数等等。

And again, and everyone knows it's going to end up in the indexes, et cetera.

好的，但这就是你今天写的，所以我们把它拿出来对比一下，你可以解释一下为什么我觉得这里有出入。

Okay, but this is what you wrote today, so we kind of hold that up in contrast, and you can explain why I see a discrepancy there.

你说：“Anthropic的消息发布当天，SpaceX获得了400亿美元的债务融资来购买GPU，而Meta表示将寻求高达950亿美元的股权融资用于其AI建设。”

So you say, "Anthropic's news comes on the same day that SpaceX secured 40 billion in debt financing to buy GPUs, and Meta said it will seek up to 95 billion in equity financing for its AI build-out.

“所有这些都对华尔街构成了一个容量考验。”

All of this poses a capacity test for Wall Street."

所以基本上问题就是，钱到位了吗？

So basically the question is, is the money there?

你已经回答过了，但请解释一下，我们如何既看到一场容量考验，同时Anthropic实际上又能得到它想要的一切。

Now you've already answered it, but explain how we're seeing both a capacity test and Anthropic will effectively get whatever it wants.

嗯，我认为这是一场容量考验，而且我认为华尔街会通过这场考验。

Well, I think it's a capacity test, and I think Wall Street is going to pass said test.

好的。

Okay.

我认为它会以优异的成绩通过，或者勉强及格。是的。

I think it's going to pass it with an A or maybe a gentleman's B. Yeah.

所以我认为那里有足够的资金。

So I think there's plenty of money there.

你看，当SpaceX上市时，有一些疑问，我不知道你是否记得。

Look, there was questions, I don't know if you remember, when SpaceX went public.

当时有各种疑问，比如，如果SpaceX上市了，其他人还能为任何事情筹到钱吗，对吧？

There was all these questions of, well, if SpaceX goes public, can anyone else get any money for anything, right?

看看这些钱。

Look at all the money.

但人们会从其他交易中撤出资金，然后投入这里——我觉得这里的现金很充足，但如果你假设Anthropic拿到那1000亿美元，再加上另外两笔交易，那差不多占了美国GDP的1%。

But folks rotate out of other trades, and they put money-- I think there is plenty of cash here, but I think if you assume that Anthropic gets their $100 billion and you add those other two deals in, it represents nearly 1% of US GDP.

其实不到，大概0.7%，但这也是非常惊人的一笔钱。

Not quite, it's like .7, but it's an extraordinary amount of money.

不过是的，我觉得有这个能力，部分原因是你提到的这三笔交易——SpaceX进入投资级债券市场，Meta进入常规股票市场，而Anthropic则是在尝试一种新的股票市场。

But yeah, I think there's the capacity, and part of that is because those three deals you talk about, SpaceX hitting the investment-grade debt market, Meta hitting kind of the regular equities market, and then Anthropic, which is kind of going for this new equities market.

它们都在争取不同的资金来源，即使是在同一家机构内部。

They're all going for different pools of capital, even if they're within the same institutions.

那怎么——

Now how would the-

我能说一句吗？我觉得如果这是三个1000亿美元的IPO同时进行，那及格线可能就有点悬了。

Can I say, I think if this was three $100 billion IPOs coming out at the same time, then I think the passing grade would be a little more questionable.

那Anthropic的融资和Meta的融资有什么不同？

Now how is the Anthropic raise that different from the Meta raise?

因为它们都是靠股权融资。

Because they're both trying to raise off equity.

基本上，这取决于人们怎么分配资金。很多会参与IPO或者Anthropic IPO的投资者，比如富达、惠灵顿、普信这些大机构，他们是真的把Anthropic当作一个新名字放进投资组合里，而Meta已经是老名字了。

Basically, it's just kind of how people are allocating your-- A lot of the investors who are going to be in an IPO or the Anthropic IPO, you're talking the Fidelities, the Wellington, the T. Rowe's of the world, who are really putting this in as a new name into their books, whereas Meta's an existing name.

所以，虽然从结构上看两者都是股权融资，但通常是由不同的基金经理来操作，他们管理的即使不是不同的基金，至少也是基金内不同的资金池。

So even though they are both equity from a structural perspective, it's usually coming at it from different managers who are literally managing, if not different funds, at least different pools of capital within funds.

好的。

Okay.

然后关于这个，还有一个问题，具体是关于财务方面的。

And then one more question about this, specifically on the finances.

你刚才说，为了给Anthropic筹钱，公司会从其他公司撤资。

You said basically, to get the money to Anthropic, companies will rotate out of other companies.

要做到这一点，需要对Anthropic的业务有真正的信心。

To do that, it takes a real belief in Anthropic's business.

而Anthropic自己在风险因素里也说了：“嘿，你看，我们才刚起步。”

And Anthropic itself, in its risk factors, said, "Hey, look, we're nascent.

这是我们第一次尝试这个。

We're trying this out for the first time.

我们真的不知道会发生什么。

We don't really know what's going to happen."

那你来聊聊，为什么投资者会这么愿意给这家公司想要的东西，尽管它显然在飞速增长，但确实存在风险。

So talk a little bit about why investors will feel so compelled To give this company what it wants based off of the fact that obviously it's growing tremendously, but there is that risk.

确实有风险。

There is that risk.

而且说实话，我这辈子没见过哪份S-1文件里有这么多风险因素，写了这么多页。

And look, I've never seen more risk factors and more pages of risk factors in an S-1 in my life.

我都开始记下来了——

I started writing them down-

这——

It's-

……发在推特上。

... on Twitter.

哦，那是——

Oh, was that-

我数到80，然后我——

I got to 80, and I-

哦，对

Oh, yeah

……

...

我就是停不下来。

I just couldn't stop.

我不得不停下来。

I had to stop.

太多了。

It was so many.

我觉得他们其实可以就写一句：“我们可能会终结人类，所以资本市场反而是次要的。”

I think they could've just stopped with, "We could end humanity, and thus, the capital markets are kind of a secondary concern."

但是……我对它有信心的原因，有一部分是因为SpaceX，对吧？

But- ... the reason I have confidence in it is a little bit because of SpaceX, right?

现在SpaceX出来了，你可以说它是一个多元化的业务，有发射和星链，但SpaceX得到的估值和资金，其实主要是基于AI计算这部分。

Now SpaceX comes out, and you could argue it's this diversified business that has launch and has Starlink, but the valuation that SpaceX got, the money SpaceX got, was really based on the AI compute piece of things.

市场很乐意给他们这些，即使他们在AI计算方面并没有真正展示出成熟的业务。

And the market was very happy to give that to them, even though they didn't really have a demonstrated business on AI compute.

而Anthropic有点不同，对吧？

And Anthropic's a little bit different, right?

它是在购买AI计算等更多东西，但总的来说，还是同样的故事，大家都在追求增长。

It's buying the AI compute and more, but still, it's the same story in general, and everybody is buying growth.

而Anthropic已经展示了它非凡的增长。

And Anthropic has shown it's got extraordinary growth.

我想和你谈谈这里的开支和自由现金流方面的事情。

I want to talk with you about the expenses here, and the free cash flow side of things.

所以Rittenhouse Research今天指出了这一点。

So Rittenhouse Research pointed this out today.

他们说，在2026年的前六个月，Anthropic产生了34亿的正自由现金流。

They say for the first six months of 2026, Anthropic generated positive free cash flow of 3.4 billion.

所以，运营现金流是39亿，减去4.82亿的资本支出。

So it's 3.9 billion of cash flow from operations, less 482 million of CapEx.

那跟我们聊聊Anthropic实现正向现金流的事，他们花在计算上的钱都算进去了吗？

So talk a little bit about Anthropic being cash flow positive, and is all the money that they're spending on compute factored in that?

看起来好像没有。

Doesn't seem like it.

对，看起来没有。

No, it doesn't seem to.

没有，而且计算支出在S-1文件里挺复杂的，因为如果你真的想把它当作传统投资，而不是单纯的追涨，那作为潜在投资者，你需要考虑很多的是未来的合同，对吧？

And the compute spend is complicated when you go through the S-1 a little bit because so much of what you have to think about as a prospective investor if you care to really be doing this as a traditional investment, not just a momentum play, is the contracts going forward, right?

就是他们承诺在未来六个月、一年、两年内要花的计算费用。

It's the compute spend that they have pledged over the next six months, year, two years.

我觉得在S-1文件里，最长的可能到2028年底。

I think that in the S-1, it goes out to the end of 2028, I think is maybe the longest.

所以这些东西有点难搞清楚。

So it's a little hard to figure that stuff out.

所以你已经看到了他们前六个月的支出，这很好。

So you've got what they spent in the first six months, great.

但对于这些公司，当你看到收入增长、业务增长和估值增长的方式时，我觉得那些滞后的指标几乎变得无关紧要了，对吧？

But with these companies, and when you look at the way the revenue is growing, the way the business is growing, the way the valuations are growing, I think the trailing indicators almost become irrelevant, right?

我们说的是截至6月30日的数据。

We're talking about through June 30th.

在我看来，那些数字似乎没那么重要。

Those numbers don't seem, to me, matter all that much.

它们重要，但没那么重要。

They matter, but they don't matter that much.

接下来的三个月会重要得多，然后大家都会得到新的数据。

The last three months is going to matter a lot more, and then everybody'll get new numbers.

我们现在已经是第四季度了。

We're already in Q4.

这个行业正在变化，而且比我们见过的任何其他行业变化得都快，对吧？

This industry is changing, and more rapidly than any other industry we've ever seen, right?

通常，你会希望每个季度、每年都有小幅增长。

Usually, you hope for small growth quarter after quarter, year over year.

对于这样的公司，同比数据已经变得无关紧要了。

The year over year numbers become irrelevant for a company like this.

Anthropic在2025年做了什么，说实话，谁在乎呢？

What Anthropic did in 2025, honestly, who cares?

但增长确实很疯狂。

But the growth is pretty crazy.

不过，还是回到这个话题，因为我觉得——

But again, just to get back to this because I feel like-

……即使数字很大，提出关键问题还是很重要的。

... it's important to ask the critical questions about this even though the numbers are big.

如果他们未来有这些巨大的计算支出，再说一次，如果你是投资者，你会怎么看待这家公司？

If they have these massive compute outlays in the future, again, if you're an investor, how do you think about this company?

很明显，他们正在开辟一个新领域，但对我来说，当这么多事情都发生在明年、后年、大后年的时候，怎么给他们归类、怎么思考这个问题，才是关键。

Clearly they're opening up a new category, but to me, the sort of determination of what box to put them in, how you think about it, when so much of the action is going to happen next year and the year after and the year after that.

就像你说的，如果他们打算投钱进这家公司，那他们怎么权衡呢？

And like you said, if they're going to move money to go invest in this company, how do you square that?

我想说这应该很难，但我觉得不会有投资者觉得难，这更多是看实际，而不是看资产负债表，对吧？

I want to say it should be hard, except I don't think you're going to see any investors view it as hard, and this is kind of more pragmatic than balance sheet, right?

我觉得大多数机构投资者都有客户，而客户会因为他们没参与这个最热门的IPO，而且这家公司上市第一天很可能成为全球市值前十的公司，而感到不满。

I think most institutional investors have clients, and clients are going to be outraged if they're not in not only just the hottest IPO, but what's going to be one of the 10 most valuable companies in the world, most likely, when it goes public on day one.

所以我觉得，除非里面有什么昨天没预料到、今天才看到的危险信号，否则这不会影响投资者是否进入这家公司，甚至可能放弃其他投资。

So I think that unless there is some flashing red light in there that was something that people weren't expecting yesterday and they saw today, I don't think it's going to impact whether investors go into this and potentially leave other things.

我明白，市场在涨，所以你不一定非得完全调仓。

And I understand, the market goes up, so you don't necessarily always have to rotate completely.

但我就是觉得大家还是会买这个，因为每个人买的更多是故事，而且这个故事某种程度上和买SpaceX时一样，我觉得明年他们也会用同样的故事买OpenAI。

But I just think everyone's going to still buy into this because everybody is buying a story more than anything else, and it's the same story arguably to some extent they bought with SpaceX, and I think it's the same story they'll buy next year with OpenAI.

我觉得投资者会看着这个说："好吧。

And I think investors will look at this and say, "All right.

我们可能会在其中一个上犯错，但我们需要买这个组合，因为整体上这个组合对我们来说会非常棒。"

We're going to be wrong about one of these, but we need to take the basket because the basket as a whole is going to be extraordinary for us.

如果其中一样东西掉到地上摔烂了，比如像番茄那样，那我们就认了。

And if one of the groceries falls to the floor and splats like a tomato, we'll take that hit."

对，那故事到底是什么？

Yeah, so what is the story?

现在说哪个会出问题还太早，而且也不会是因为我们今天看到的这些数字。

And it's too early to know which one that's going to be, and it's not going to be because of some of the numbers we're seeing today.

故事是什么？

What is the story?

你说这三家讲的是同一个故事。

You said it's the same story they're telling about all three.

你觉得这个故事是什么？

What would you say the story is?

我觉得故事就是，Anthropic或者OpenAI，或者随便选一家这样的公司，基本上会变成——我们常说的基础模型。

I think the story is that Anthropic or OpenAI, or pick one of these companies, is kind of going to become-- We talk about foundation models.

但我觉得故事的核心是，这将成为未来商业和社会的基础。

But I think the story is this is going to be the foundation for business and society going forward.

确实是基础性的，就像——这有点复杂，因为人们总是谈论互联网和互联网泡沫，问题是这些公司是不是就像当年的CLEC，那些真正铺设光纤的公司，而大多数人在这些公司上并没有赚到钱。

Truly foundational, much like-- It's complicated because people always talk about the internet and there's the dot-com boom, and the question are these really kind of the CLECs of the time, the companies that were really putting fiber in the ground, which didn't work out very well for most people.

真正赚钱的是建立在它们之上的东西。

It was the stuff built on top of them.

这有可能，但我认为这里的不同之处在于，这些公司本身实际上在构建很多应用，而当年的CLEC和光纤层并没有在它们之上构建任何东西。

That's possible, but I think a difference here is that these companies themselves are actually building a lot of applications, whereas the CLECs of the day and the fiber layers didn't build anything on top of it.

它们实际上只是公用事业。

They were just actually the utility.

在这种情况下，Anthropic试图两者兼顾，OpenAI也是如此。

In this case, Anthropic is trying to be both, and so is OpenAI.

收入增长本身非常惊人。

The revenue growth itself is extraordinary.

他们从三年前的4100万美元收入增长到2026年上半年的163亿美元。

They went from 41 million in revenue three years ago to 16.3 billion in the first half of 2026.

没错。

Correct.

这种情况不会发生。

That doesn't happen.

确实不会发生，而且我觉得更值得注意的是，大概就在18个月前，我跟OpenAI的投资者聊天时，他们还觉得这场前沿模型竞赛的胜负已定。

It doesn't happen, and what's I think- Almost more remarkable is that it's only probably about maybe 18 months ago that when I would speak to investors in OpenAI, they felt that this race, the frontier model race, was already determined.

他们知道Anthropic，但没想到它会崛起，因为当你跟OpenAI的投资者聊到这个时，我会说：“对，但Anthropic不是更专注于B2B市场吗？”

They knew Anthropic, but they didn't see it coming because when you would talk to OpenAI investors about this, and I'd say, "Yeah, but doesn't Anthropic, it's going to be going after more of a B2B marketplace.

你们更出名的是ChatGPT，我妈或者我自己作为消费者在用。

You guys are more known for ChatGPT and my mom using it or me using it as a consumer."

他们的回答会是：“对，但拥有消费者才是关键。”

The answer would be, "Yeah, but owning the consumer is what matters."

他们会拿很多年前的谷歌来举例。

They would point to Google from years ago.

拥有消费者才是关键。

Owning the consumer is what matters.

B2B市场会很小，而他们在这方面判断失误得离谱。

The B2B place is going to be small, and they misread that extraordinarily.

每位员工带来660万美元的收入。

6.6 million in revenue per employee.

这个数字和你们通常看到的科技公司上市时的水平相比怎么样？

How does that rank with what you typically see- ... technology companies IPO-ing with?

我没具体算过，但肯定更高，而且是成倍地高。

I haven't done the math on it, except it's more, and by exponent.

每位员工660万美元，这个数字太疯狂了。

6.6 million per employee, that's an insane number.

简直不可思议，对Anthropic来说也是惊人的。

It's just insane number, and it's even insane for Anthropic.

我记得去年，他们不是说这个数字大概是1.4吗？

I think last year, didn't they say it was like the same number was 1.4?

我现在是凭记忆说的，但差不多就是那个数。

I'm saying this now off the top of my head, but it was something like that.

也就是个位数。

It was in the ones.

这个数字太疯狂了。

It's a crazy number.

是的。

Yep.

想想看，对任何公司来说都是这样。

Think about that for any company.

140万——

1.4 million-

……在2025年9月。

... in September 2025.

不，这个数字太离谱了，这正好说明他们的营收增长有多快。

No, it's a ridiculous number, and it just shows how fast they are scaling on the top line.

还有一点很有意思，Cloud Code和Cloud Cowork是他们营收增长的重要推动力，而且我觉得Cloud Cowork本身的增长速度其实比Code还要快。

And what's interesting also is that Cloud Code and Cloud Cowork have been a big part of their ability to scale revenue, and I think that Cloud Cowork itself is actually growing faster than Code did.

我觉得你说得对。

I think you're right about that.

我手头没有具体数字，但我觉得——

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I think-

……你说得对。

... you're right about that.

嗯，接下来看这家公司会很有意思——

Well, it'll be interesting to watch with this company over the next-

……未来几个季度，假设他们上市了，我们就能像对待普通上市公司一样，持续看到他们的季度财报。

... several quarters, assuming they go public, and we continue to get quarterly earnings from them as a regular public company.

我觉得很多东西会一直反复变化，就像我们看到的他们和OpenAI之间在模型性能或收入上谁领先的反复拉锯一样。

I think a lot of this stuff is going to keep flip-flopping back and forth, just like we've seen flip-flops back and forth between them and OpenAI when it comes to who's actually in the lead, either in terms of model performance or in terms of revenue.

我觉得在Anthropic这样的公司内部也会看到同样的情况。

I think you're going to see the same thing internally at a company like Anthropic.

在我看来，他们在S-1里花了大量篇幅谈生物学和生物相关的工作等等。

They spent an enormous amount of time, to me, in the S-1 talking about biology and bio efforts, et cetera.

虽然那目前还没真正给他们带来多少收入，但——

And not that that's making them any money really yet, but-

你读到这里几乎会想，天哪，三四年后，Dario可能觉得那会是他们业务的核心，也就是他们收入的主要来源。

... you almost read this and think, man, in three or four years, Dario kind of thinks that might be the core of their business in terms of where their money's coming from.

对我来说，最有趣的是，在我们拿到的上一版文件里，有两个客户占了他们收入的25%。

To me, the most interesting thing is, in the last version of this that we got, there was two customers making up 25% of their revenue.

今天的最新消息，我觉得最有新闻价值的是这个。

Here's the update today that I think was most newsworthy.

没有任何单一客户占我们收入的10%以上。

No single customer represented more than 10% of our revenue.

截至2026年9月30日的九个月里，大约79%的收入来自前五大客户之外的客户，这是截至2026年9月30日的三个月的数据。

For the nine months ended September 30th, 2026, approximately 79% of our revenue came from customers outside of our top five customers for the three months ended September 30th, 2026.

他们的收入确实在实现多元化。

There's a real diversification of revenue that they have going on there.

他们确实需要这样，而且这是一个很长的尾巴。

Which they need, and it's a very long tail.

但这也是像这样的公司未来所需要的。

But which is what a company like that's going to need.

如果你想成为商业和社会的基础，就像我说的，你需要做到这一点。

If you want to be the foundation of business and of society, as I said, you need that.

你需要让每个人都在使用它，或者至少接近每个人都在使用它。

You need everybody using it or at least close to everybody using it.

对。

Yep.

但他们确实有些集中，嗯，在那些超大规模云服务商那里。

But they do have some concentration in, well, in the hyperscalers.

我不知道你会怎么——

I don't know what you'd-

当然。

Sure

……看待这个。

... make of this.

总收入的48%来自Anthropic、谷歌和微软的市场。

48% of total revenue comes from Anthropic, Google, and Microsoft marketplaces.

我想这仍然是来自多样化的客户群体。

I guess that's still coming from a diverse base of customers.

但有趣的是，他们如此依赖超大规模云服务商，而其中三家中有两家投资了他们。

But it is interesting that they rely so heavily on the hyperscalers, two of the three of which have invested in them.

考虑到这个业务的性质，我并不感到特别惊讶。

I'm not terribly surprised by that when you think about what the business is.

但你说得对。

But you're right.

但问题变成了，而且这其实不在讨论范围内，但我甚至不知道你怎么做，真正的最终用户是谁？

But the question becomes, and it's not really in there, but I don't even know how you do this, what are really the end users of that?

正如你所说，亚马逊和谷歌的市场，好吧，那是所有人——

As you say, Amazon and Google marketplaces, okay, that's everyone-

基本上。

... essentially.

所以它们集中在超大规模云服务商那里并不奇怪。

And so it's not surprising they're concentrated with the hyperscalers.

还有谁会跟他们提前签这么大的合同，谁会愿意投入进去呢？

Who else is going to sign giant contracts with them up front, and who's going to go into them?

所以这并不让我意外，但确实是从消费者到企业用途的广泛多元化。

So it doesn't surprise me, but it is this broader diversification, though, of everything from consumers to the business use.

而且，再回到企业用途，也就是B2B这块，他们几年前做了一个大多数人都不敢做的赌注，要么从那里起步，要么在销售上大力主攻那里，现在看来显然得到了回报。

And, again, just to go back to the business use then, or the B2B piece of this, they made a bet that most people weren't making a couple of years ago to start there, or if not start there, to really hit there hard from a sales perspective, and it has clearly paid off.

还有一点值得记住，他们决定在OpenAI之前上市，或者现在上市而不是推迟到明年，这并非板上钉钉的事。

And again, it's worth remembering the decision to go public before OpenAI or the decision to go public now and not push it into next year was not a sure thing.

原因有很多。

There's all sorts of reasons.

这两个月来，人们一直在讨论这件事。

People for two months have been doing this.

他们会不会上市？

Will they or won't they?

该不该上市？

Should they or shouldn't they?

每次营收数据出来的时候，当然，还有安全相关的事情出来的时候。

Every time revenue comes out, obviously, when the safety stuff came out.

他们决定继续推进，我觉得至少从他们的角度来看，这显示了他们的实力。

The fact that they're going forward, I think is, at least from their perspective, is a show of strength.

而且，你显然会提到营收增长，这个我们已经讨论过了。

And one of the things that, obviously, you point to the revenue growth, which we've discussed.

然后还有计算效率，这个非常有意思。

And then there's the compute efficiency, which is very interesting.

这是一张图表，显示的是他们每美元计算投入带来的营收。

This is a chart that came out in terms of the revenue per dollar of compute that they're making.

在2025年第一季度，每美元只有40美分。

In 2025 Q1, it was 40 cents per dollar.

所以他们在每美元的计算投入上都是亏钱的。

So they were losing money on every dollar of compute.

现在，这个数字是2.08美元。

Today, it is $2.08.

能扭转成这样，真是太不可思议了。

That's wild to be able to reverse that the way that they have.

很明显，这要归功于Cloud Code和Cloud Cowork的效果。

Obviously, that's the Cloud Code and Cloud Cowork effect.

确实如此。

It is.

这很有意思。

It's interesting.

关于数据中心的建设以及投入其中的巨额资金和能源，讨论已经很多了。

There's been so much talk or a lot of talk, with the data center build-out and the enormous amount of money that's gone toward it and gone toward energy towards data centers.

如果数据中心或GPU的效率大幅提升，不是小幅提升，而是大幅提升，或者模型本身效率大幅提升，那我们可能就不需要那么多设施了。

What if data centers become just so much more efficient, not incrementally, but become so much more efficient or GPUs do that we don't need all the stuff or if the models do.

对Anthropic来说，这是他们未来发展的一个重大利好。

And for Anthropic, that's a big bull case for them going forward.

因为一切都会变得更高效，这意味着他们的支出比例会大幅下降。

That this is all going to become so much more efficient, which means that their spend is going to get to go way down, at least as a percentage.

当然，随着使用的人越来越多，提示词也越来越多，他们的支出肯定还会继续上升。

Obviously, their spend will continue to go up as more people use it, and there's more prompts, et cetera.

但如果这些模型变得更高效，不需要消耗那么多资源，那他们的大问题就是支出这块。

But if these models become much more efficient and don't need to use as much, that's their big problem, is their spend side.

问题不在收入端，而在支出端。

It's not the revenue side, it's the spend side.

效率对他们来说就是一切，如果他们能证明未来效率在提升，那这些业务才能真正变得可行，而现在他们还在亏损。

The efficiency is the ballgame for them, and if they can point to increased efficiency going forward, that's going to make these actually viable businesses, which right now they are still unprofitable.

再说，Anthropic上市不是为了博眼球。

And again, Anthropic isn't just going public because it wants headlines.

Anthropic上市是因为它需要资金。

Anthropic is going public because it needs money.

不过，让我给你读一段SemiAnalysis的文章。

Although, let me read you this from SemiAnalysis.

我想听听你对这个现金储备问题的看法。

I want to get your reaction to this one in terms of cash on hand.

SemiAnalysis 指出了这一点。

SemiAnalysis pointed this out.

“截至2026年6月30日，我们已累计筹集了1410亿美元的资本和现金，以及1120亿美元的现金及现金等价物，还有193亿美元的短期投资。”

"As of June 30th, 2026, we have raised an aggregate of $141 billion of capital and cash, and cash equivalents of $112 billion in short-term investments."

哦，“并且拥有1120亿美元的现金及现金等价物，以及193亿美元的短期投资。”

Oh, "And had cash and cash equivalents of $112 billion in short-term investments of $19.3 billion."

所以这意味着，SemiAnalysis 从中解读出，他们只烧掉了其中的97亿美元，而且还有几个季度是盈利的。

So that means, what SemiAnalysis is reading there is that they've only burned $9.7 billion of that, and they also had a couple profitable quarters.

你对此怎么看？

What do you read on that front?

他们真的需要钱吗？

Do they actually need money?

我得看看那些数字，我之前没看过。

I would have to look at those numbers, which I hadn't looked.

所以假设——

So assuming that-

但是，你——

But you-

请继续。

Go ahead.

你看，这——

Look, it's-

他们确实在投入资金。

They are committing the money.

他们确实在投入资金。

They are committing the money.

嗯，他们显然有巨额合同，未来的支出合同也很大。

Well, they've got huge contracts, obviously, going forward, huge spend contracts going forward.

如果他们手头有那么多现金，那很有意思，因为他们可能在其中几个季度实现了盈利。

That's interesting if they've got that much cash on hand because they might have had a couple profitable quarters in there.

他们整体上仍然没有盈利，并且预计还要花钱。

They are still unprofitable as a whole and are expecting to spend money.

他们接下来要花钱的一个方向，而且已经开始做了，OpenAI比他们做得更多，可能就是收购。

One thing that they're going to spend money on, and they've started doing this, OpenAI's done it more than them, is probably going to be acquisitions.

就像我说的，像Anthropic这样的公司要想超越单纯的工具角色，就必须在它上面构建更多东西，而他们确实在这么做。

As I said, for a company like Anthropic to be more than the utility, they're going to have to build stuff on top of it, and they are.

他们正在内部开发很多东西。

They're building a lot of stuff in-house.

他们也会通过收购来获取很多这样的东西，而且可以用股票来支付。

They're also going to buy a lot of that, and you could do that via stock.

这是上市的好处之一。

It's one of the good things about going public.

你现在有了一种可以交易的公开货币。

You now have a public currency to trade.

他们会用大量现金去收购，而且他们也需要现金来收购。

They're going to use a lot of cash to buy stuff, and they're going to need cash to buy stuff.

我刚看了S-1文件。

I just looked at the S-1.

看起来这和SemiAnalysis要说的是一致的。

It looks like that matches up with what SemiAnalysis was going to say.

好的，最后再说一件事。

Okay, one last thing here.

风险因素部分很有意思。

It said in the risk factors, the risk factors were very interesting.

最上面就是关于算力的内容。

Way up top is the compute part of it.

“如果我们无法获得足够的算力，或者无法有效地将算力分配到各个工作负载中，我们可能无法训练出与竞争对手匹敌的模型，也无法充分服务我们的客户。”

"If we are unable to secure adequate compute or if we fail to direct our compute effectively across our workloads, we may be unable to train models that remain competitive with those of our competitors or adequately serve our customers."

丹，我觉得在过去一周左右的时间里，我们看到了新云服务商的起起落落，市场甚至开始质疑像Meta这样的公司，它们似乎急于筹集更多资金来建设更多算力。

Dan, we've, I think over the past week or so, just seen these up and downs with the neo clouds and the market even questioning companies like Meta, it seems like, who've been eager to raise more money to build more compute.

稍微聊聊这个——AI游戏是不是归根结底就看投资者是否足够信任你，让你能买到生存所需的算力？

Just talk a little bit about the, does the AI game just boil down to do investors trust you enough to buy the compute you need to survive?

我觉得这是其中一部分。

I think that's a piece of it.

我觉得这么总结挺到位的。

I think that's a good way to sum it up.

我完全不担心Anthropic买不到算力，因为——

I have no concerns that Anthropic's going to be able to buy the compute because-

首先，它是这个领域里最大的玩家之一。

... for starters, it's the biggest dog, one of the biggest dogs on the block.

他们肯定能排在最前面。

They are going to be at the front of the line.

又不是什么新创公司。

It's not going to be a new startup.

尤其是如果他们上市了，手里有那么多现金，那就更没问题了。

It's going to be them, particularly if they go public and have all this extra cash on hand.

不过说实话，这还不是里面最有趣的风险因素。

But look, it's not the most interesting risk factor in there.

但话说回来，我觉得这可能是最——

But no, I think it's probably the most-

里面最实际的风险因素。

... practical risk factor in there.

对，最有趣的风险因素是我们的产品模型可能会伤害你。

Yeah, the most interesting risk factor is our product models can cause you harm.

你早就知道肯定会有这一条。

Which you just kind of knew that was going to be in there.

哦，这还不止是伤害你。

Oh, it's beyond cause you harm.

这是要终结人类。

It's end humanity.

毁灭地球。

Destroy the planet.

我认为这是对人类生存的威胁。

I think it's an existential threat to humanity.

顺便说一句，我喜欢你读到的这个，我会转述一下，但基本上就是说，这既是内部也是外部的担忧。

Which by the way, I love when you read it, and I'm going to paraphrase this, but it's kind of like, that's a concern internally and externally.

我们可能会终结我们所知的人类文明。

We could end humanity as we know it.

这可能会影响我们的财务表现。

Which could impact our financial performance.

对，这还用说。

Yeah, no shit.

那确实会影响你的财务表现。

That could impact your financial performance.

我来读一下。

I'll read it.

“我们组织内部以及其他研究人员、监管机构、政策制定者和行业参与者都提出了担忧，认为如果先进的人工智能系统在没有适当保障、监督和安全措施的情况下开发、部署和运营，可能会对人类构成灾难性或存在性风险，特别是如果这些系统被滥用、复制、武器化，或被允许在高度自主的情况下运行。”

"Concerns have been raised both within our organization and by other researchers, regulators, policymakers, and industry participants that sufficiently advanced AI systems could, if not developed, deployed, and operated with appropriate safeguards, oversight, and security measures, pose catastrophic or existential risks to humanity, particularly if such systems were misused, replicated, weaponized, or allowed to operate with a high degree of autonomy."

丹，在财务报告的历史上，有没有哪份S-1文件里出现过这样的句子？

Dan, in the history of financial reporting, has there ever been a sentence like that in an S-1?

没有，因为我觉得奥本海默没有上市。

No, because I don't think Oppenheimer went public.

所以不，我不这么认为。

So no, I don't.

不，不，不，完全没有类似的情况。

No. No. No. Nothing like this.

而且我要说，过去这两个月，自从Cox那件事出来之后，有很多评论说，他们必须在上市之前解决这个问题——

And I will say, there's been a lot of commentary over the last, what it's been, two months since the Cox and thing came out about well, they're going to have to resolve this issue before they go-

不可能。

Not possible.

……好吧，不管可不可能，显然他们没解决。

... well, whether possible or not, clearly not.

他们甚至都没真的在尝试。

They're not even really trying to.

这也不是在批评他们。

And that's not even a knock on them.

我觉得他们做不到。

I don't think they can.

但不管怎样，这个肯定会写进去的。

But no, this is going to be in there.

再说一遍，不管你是否投资这个IPO，或者你已经在里面了，都不会影响或改变Anthropic会不会毁灭世界这个事实。

And again, whether you invest in the IPO or whether you are invested in the IPO or not is not going to impact or change the fact that Anthropic could or could not destroy the world.

而这又会让你投资组合里的其他东西变得一文不值。

Which will, again, render the rest of your portfolio meaningless.

Anthropic的表现会怎么影响到OpenAI呢？

How does Anthropic's performance here trickle to OpenAI?

会的。

It will.

因为它是最直接的对比对象。

Because it's the most direct comp.

SpaceX算是一个参考，看你怎么理解Meta那部分，但这个是最直接的一对一比较。

SpaceX is kind of a comp, and depending on how you want to suss out the meta piece of it, but this is the most direct one-to-one.

这两家公司本质上是一样的。

These are essentially the same company.

再说，SpaceX有星链，还有其他业务。

Again, SpaceX has Starlink and it's got other things.

发射业务，还有马斯克。

Launch, and it's got Elon.

所以我觉得对OpenAI来说，不管Anthropic的估值是多少，哪怕从市盈率的角度看，都会影响OpenAI未来上市时的表现。

So I think for OpenAI, I think whatever Anthropic is trading at, from even a multiples perspective, is going to impact what happens to OpenAI if and when it goes public.

对。

Yes.

除非在这两家公司上市之间有什么重大的创新或变化。

Unless there's some major innovation or change in the interim between the two.

好的。

Okay.

你在通讯稿结尾写道：“很多公司在提交S-1文件后又临阵退缩。”

You closed your newsletter with, "Plenty of companies flip their S-1s and then get cold feet.

Anthropic无论从财务状况还是声誉上，都承受不起成为其中一员。

Anthropic can't afford to be one of them in terms of both its balance sheet and its reputation."