BREAKINGVIEWS-What Happens If OpenAI Or Anthropic Fail?

By Karen Kwok

LONDON, March 11 (Reuters Breakingviews) - The artificial intelligence boom would make for a nasty bust. Alphabet GOOGL.O, Amazon.com AMZN.O, Meta Platforms META.O, and Microsoft MSFT.O plan to spend about $650 billion this year largely on chip-packed data centres powering chatbots. Much of that capacity will serve cash-burning AI labs such as OpenAI and Anthropic, the developers of ChatGPT and Claude. Breakneck growth and bottomless funding sustain them. If either falters, the consequences could be ugly.

The scale is staggering. Big Tech’s spending commitments are roughly equivalent to 2% of U.S. GDP last year. Morgan Stanley foresees $2.9 trillion of global data-centre investment between 2025 and 2028, of which it expects roughly $900 billion will come from private credit and asset-backed lending. The boom now stretches far beyond Silicon Valley into lenders, utilities and infrastructure investors.

OpenAI's ambitions underscore the sheer scale of the financial mobilization. CEO Sam Altman has floated infrastructure build-out deals worth $1.4 trillion, requiring 30 gigawatts of power, enough to supply 20 million U.S. households. Headline figures probably overstate the immediate outlay, given the company’s complex web of overlapping deals and multi-year partnerships. Still, this is a massive amount of capital due to flow into cloud providers like Oracle ORCL.N, Microsoft, Amazon, and CoreWeave CRWV.O, as well as chip and gear-makers including Nvidia NVDA.O and Broadcom AVGO.O.

Funding all of this will be an increasingly difficult challenge. HSBC estimates that OpenAI may need $207 billion in additional financing by 2030. True, the company just announced a $110 billion funding round. But such sums increasingly bear asterisks.

Take Amazon. It pledged $50 billion of the round, but this begins with an initial payment of about $15 billion, with further outlays tied to Altman successfully leading his company onto public markets or surpassing a smarter-than-human technological milestone known as “artificial general intelligence", whichever comes first. SoftBank, expected to add another $30 billion, is itself under pressure: S&P Global recently assigned the Japanese group a negative credit outlook as it explores a bridge loan of up to $40 billion, according to Bloomberg.

Both OpenAI and Anthropic are considering initial public offerings as soon as this year, as the Financial Times and Reuters reported, so the hope may be that public investors can soon substitute for private ones. True, growth is extraordinary: OpenAI topped $25 billion in annualized revenue as of end of February, The Information reported, up 25% from the end of December. Yet competition is scaling quickly, especially among cheap and ubiquitous open-source systems that pressure pricing across the industry.

Public investors would also need to have strong stomachs for red ink. HSBC analysts in late November estimated almost $280 billion of cash burn for OpenAI between now and the end of 2030. In a court filing this week, Anthropic’s CFO said the company had spent over $10 billion on training models and serving up responses to user queries, all to generate roughly $5 billion of cumulative revenue. It shows that the arithmetic is unforgiving unless computing costs fall sharply or customers pay far more.

To nonetheless achieve a mooted $1 trillion IPO valuation, OpenAI would need to maintain extremely rapid growth. Nvidia and Alphabet trade on average at 5.6 times expected sales in 2030, according to Visible Alpha. Applying a standard 30% IPO discount to that multiple, OpenAI would need to generate at least $250 billion in annual revenue by 2030. CNBC reports that internal targets are even higher, at $280 billion. But to succeed, OpenAI would have to build a business the size of today's Microsoft in just four years.

Big Tech, along with the broader AI supply chain, ultimately depends on the success of OpenAI and Anthropic. Microsoft said last month that 45% of its $625 billion in demand backlog is tied to OpenAI, while Altman has inked a $300 billion deal with Oracle. Together, that’s about two-thirds of the $800 billion HSBC estimates OpenAI could spend on chips and data centers, with the rest spread across Nvidia, AMD AMD.O, Amazon and CoreWeave.

While the scale is smaller, Anthropic is also set to spend many billions more. Yet a recent battle with the Pentagon adds fresh uncertainty, beyond whether it can even fund its plans. After CEO Dario Amodei resisted allowing Claude to be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons, the Trump administration labelled the company a supply-chain risk, with defense chief Pete Hegseth claiming that no government contractor can work with it. Anthropic has sued to overturn these moves, saying that they violate its rights to free expression and due process. For now, cloud partners Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft say they will continue offering Claude to customers.

Granted, in a worst-case scenario, creditors and investors tend to assume that a buyer would emerge for a weakened OpenAI or Anthropic. Microsoft, Amazon or another strategic bidder would benefit greatly from their technology, talent and user base.

But such a rescue would likely come with a sharp valuation reset and a rethink of how much computing power the industry truly needs. And there’s another, more general problem. Wall Street is beginning to question the sustainability of the AI spending boom itself. Credit-default swaps on Oracle have climbed to their highest levels since 2008. Shares of Microsoft and Amazon slid after both companies reiterated plans to increase capital spending.

Should AI labs or Big Tech's generative AI monetization fall short of expectations, the capital flows required to build capacity could quickly dry up. If data-centre expansion slows, it would plausibly reduce sales of Nvidia chips, leave major investments in power infrastructure underutilized, and lenders uncertain. In that sense, the failure of a single lab would not be a simple corporate stumble. It would drag down a historically massive boom.