My theory is that acquiring TBPN is a news and ideology layer from which OpenAI can build training data. Who needs to pay for IP from the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg when you can buy a podcast that summarizes the best business stories and adds more conversational context?
Very sure that could be an added benefit (depending on how IP/library is stipulated in terms) - good reason for OpenAI to want to own it even if the audience stays niche since the value to them wouldn't depend on viewers but on hosts/guests. That said I think there is a lot more intangible / cultural value being hopefully acquired here!
heh, my business mind says that OpenAI can also sell ad packages across media and chat. and if the IP wasn't included in the $100mil, then I don't know what they bought... you can't buy a personality or a team longer than a contract period, and media companies make more money monetizing their archives than from the news of the day. an audience of 70k and podcast content on its own are not particularly valuable assets, especially not to a company valued/used as highly as OpenAI.
Respect the take for sure, I just can't argue with math on this one! We live in a power law world so the top 0.01% of anything can fetch an infinite price. Just look at the researchers that are being hired / poached by the big AI labs. OAI's scale justifies that at even a fractional positive bump could move the EV billions.
I mean they are all overpaying for everything and overvaluing everything because they like the BDE look of it all. They want to own a media company because look at what Elon does with his.
but the valuation of openAI is in its product performance and future interpretation of and access to information, not in the talent it hires. its business product is crap compared to Claude, and it needs more expert training data and access to news. $100m is cheaper than leasing it from IP.
"Company has a media arm" is a very familiar business play I've been deeply integrated with for more than a decade, including for multiple Fortune 10 clients. at the end of the day, the value is in how the media product serves the business model of the purchasing company--not the audience or the talent.
I think they work hard and created something special but I also felt the air go out of the balloon almost immediately and a number of other people have noticed that too. There seems to be less energy. Also people on X seem to feel the clips are being shadow banned
"The better show has been watching it get made" — that's the line I'll carry.
It names something I hadn't seen articulated: the audience wasn't watching a show, they were witnessing construction. Which is the old pilgrimage instinct in new clothes. The Camino is not the cathedral in Santiago; it's the walking. People go because they want to be near something being made — often, what's being made is themselves.
The acquisition problem might be sharper than "exit reads like an ending." The witnessing was the product. You can buy the team, the show, the brand. You can't buy the state of being unfinished in public. That's the thing that dissolves the moment it's owned — no narrative reset recovers it. A season two of a canonized show is a different genre.
With all due credit to what TBPN accomplished, the reality is it only has a devoted following within Tech Twitter — an audience OAI already has captured. If the play was to use the TBPN team’s talents to win over the broader population that is skeptical or downright hostile towards AI, I don’t see how this moves the needle. A media property that has mass appeal would be better suited to provide guidance on how to win over that group, if media/storytelling is the angle OAI thinks is critical for that.
The point I would push back on is that OAI has already captured the tech twitter constituency with certainty and longevity. There’s a massive culture war being waged among top AI labs even in this corner of the world. The mass appeal is more an experimental play split between growing this show (which the hosts/team also want) and helping with other comms - my two cents!
Openai hopes for transitive vibes, but what about the vibes running the other way? They are state media now and the state is not well liked by the citizens. The creator world benefits from the "corporate media" bogeyman, even the ones who don't use it as a weapon. Much is lost in losing the "indie" label, even if they never claimed to be journalists. And even if the politically oblivious/dismissive tech crowd still tunes in, I doubt this puts a friendly face on the company to anyone who matters -- especially anyone fearful of AI. Tech can keep making its end run around journalism, but AI has a problem that borrowing vibes will not solve.
Nailed this here I think:
"There’s a deeper reason charisma now matters more at an AI lab than anywhere else: AI is an inherently difficult protagonist to root for. It’s abstract, threatening, moves fast, and doesn’t have a face. John and Jordi have proven they can make people feel okay, good even, about AI progress. They’re likable faces for an unlikable protagonist that needs to win over the world (while sociopolitical dissent keeps rising). It’s a personhood play — for John and Jordi’s uniquely human presence to soften an inhuman one."
All valid points - in the end it’s a deal where both sides see an opportunity that comes with risk. In the case of TBPN, surely they know the risks, they’re savvy, but they also have to consider what the alternate path looks like to, I think most people understand why they would take this kind of offer in the current environment.
OAI I think this mostly a flyer on a team that looks like a tech-savvy cultural unicorn - “what if TBPN is a secret weapon” vibes - have to think about the price relative to their size and size of their funding rounds lately. It’s valuable even if it helps them with the “tech twitter” audience and hiring, and aspirationally more decision makers and consumers.
My theory is that acquiring TBPN is a news and ideology layer from which OpenAI can build training data. Who needs to pay for IP from the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg when you can buy a podcast that summarizes the best business stories and adds more conversational context?
Very sure that could be an added benefit (depending on how IP/library is stipulated in terms) - good reason for OpenAI to want to own it even if the audience stays niche since the value to them wouldn't depend on viewers but on hosts/guests. That said I think there is a lot more intangible / cultural value being hopefully acquired here!
heh, my business mind says that OpenAI can also sell ad packages across media and chat. and if the IP wasn't included in the $100mil, then I don't know what they bought... you can't buy a personality or a team longer than a contract period, and media companies make more money monetizing their archives than from the news of the day. an audience of 70k and podcast content on its own are not particularly valuable assets, especially not to a company valued/used as highly as OpenAI.
Respect the take for sure, I just can't argue with math on this one! We live in a power law world so the top 0.01% of anything can fetch an infinite price. Just look at the researchers that are being hired / poached by the big AI labs. OAI's scale justifies that at even a fractional positive bump could move the EV billions.
I mean they are all overpaying for everything and overvaluing everything because they like the BDE look of it all. They want to own a media company because look at what Elon does with his.
but the valuation of openAI is in its product performance and future interpretation of and access to information, not in the talent it hires. its business product is crap compared to Claude, and it needs more expert training data and access to news. $100m is cheaper than leasing it from IP.
"Company has a media arm" is a very familiar business play I've been deeply integrated with for more than a decade, including for multiple Fortune 10 clients. at the end of the day, the value is in how the media product serves the business model of the purchasing company--not the audience or the talent.
likable faces for an unlikable protagonist! Half media, half machine wow! This is an amazing read
Thanks for reading! 🙏
So good ! As you said Ai should just go for "Culture projects" !
🙏
Love reading this, thank you for this
🙏
I think they work hard and created something special but I also felt the air go out of the balloon almost immediately and a number of other people have noticed that too. There seems to be less energy. Also people on X seem to feel the clips are being shadow banned
Directionally don't disagree! The second act, or third act is always the hardest - so this is where they will be tested!
"The better show has been watching it get made" — that's the line I'll carry.
It names something I hadn't seen articulated: the audience wasn't watching a show, they were witnessing construction. Which is the old pilgrimage instinct in new clothes. The Camino is not the cathedral in Santiago; it's the walking. People go because they want to be near something being made — often, what's being made is themselves.
The acquisition problem might be sharper than "exit reads like an ending." The witnessing was the product. You can buy the team, the show, the brand. You can't buy the state of being unfinished in public. That's the thing that dissolves the moment it's owned — no narrative reset recovers it. A season two of a canonized show is a different genre.
The take I needed!
🙏
With all due credit to what TBPN accomplished, the reality is it only has a devoted following within Tech Twitter — an audience OAI already has captured. If the play was to use the TBPN team’s talents to win over the broader population that is skeptical or downright hostile towards AI, I don’t see how this moves the needle. A media property that has mass appeal would be better suited to provide guidance on how to win over that group, if media/storytelling is the angle OAI thinks is critical for that.
The point I would push back on is that OAI has already captured the tech twitter constituency with certainty and longevity. There’s a massive culture war being waged among top AI labs even in this corner of the world. The mass appeal is more an experimental play split between growing this show (which the hosts/team also want) and helping with other comms - my two cents!
Openai hopes for transitive vibes, but what about the vibes running the other way? They are state media now and the state is not well liked by the citizens. The creator world benefits from the "corporate media" bogeyman, even the ones who don't use it as a weapon. Much is lost in losing the "indie" label, even if they never claimed to be journalists. And even if the politically oblivious/dismissive tech crowd still tunes in, I doubt this puts a friendly face on the company to anyone who matters -- especially anyone fearful of AI. Tech can keep making its end run around journalism, but AI has a problem that borrowing vibes will not solve.
Nailed this here I think:
"There’s a deeper reason charisma now matters more at an AI lab than anywhere else: AI is an inherently difficult protagonist to root for. It’s abstract, threatening, moves fast, and doesn’t have a face. John and Jordi have proven they can make people feel okay, good even, about AI progress. They’re likable faces for an unlikable protagonist that needs to win over the world (while sociopolitical dissent keeps rising). It’s a personhood play — for John and Jordi’s uniquely human presence to soften an inhuman one."
All valid points - in the end it’s a deal where both sides see an opportunity that comes with risk. In the case of TBPN, surely they know the risks, they’re savvy, but they also have to consider what the alternate path looks like to, I think most people understand why they would take this kind of offer in the current environment.
OAI I think this mostly a flyer on a team that looks like a tech-savvy cultural unicorn - “what if TBPN is a secret weapon” vibes - have to think about the price relative to their size and size of their funding rounds lately. It’s valuable even if it helps them with the “tech twitter” audience and hiring, and aspirationally more decision makers and consumers.