>Was Pets.com burning tens of billions of dollars per year? This comparison is not favorable to Anthropic.
You can't just look at burn rate.
Let's compare Anthropic and Pets.com and see who it favors.
Pets.com lost about $8 for every $1 of revenue. They paid $2.24 for every $1 of dog food it sold - dog food you could already buy in the store.
Anthropic lost about $1.70 per $1 in 2025, on a product that didn’t exist a few years ago. There revenue has since grown about 7x.
And my point doesn’t rely on this comparison, which I think so clearly favors Anthropic. Pets.com died, yet internet services are more widespread than ever. People even buy pet food online more than ever. If Anthropic folds, the models and the demand for them don’t go away with it.
You can't just look at burn rate.
Let's compare Anthropic and Pets.com and see who it favors.
Pets.com lost about $8 for every $1 of revenue. They paid $2.24 for every $1 of dog food it sold - dog food you could already buy in the store.
Anthropic lost about $1.70 per $1 in 2025, on a product that didn’t exist a few years ago. There revenue has since grown about 7x.
And my point doesn’t rely on this comparison, which I think so clearly favors Anthropic. Pets.com died, yet internet services are more widespread than ever. People even buy pet food online more than ever. If Anthropic folds, the models and the demand for them don’t go away with it.