OpenAI's Genius Comeback : How Altman Turned a $27B Loss Into an EMPIRE?
Think School explains how OpenAI can be on track to lose $33 billion in 2026 on a $25 billion revenue run rate - and why the channel believes the comeback has already started. The whole loss story is inference: training happens once, but every ChatGPT query fires up GPUs, and 900 million users will burn about $14 billion of inference in 2026. Heavy users cost more than their subscriptions, competition has collapsed token prices a thousand-fold in three years, and OpenAI rents four of the five layers of Jensen Huang's AI cake. The comeback rests on four moves: GPT-5.6 (Soul, Terra and Luna) matching Claude Fable 5 at roughly a third of the cost, Codex exploding 500% in active users, the GPT Work super app, and Halapino - OpenAI's first custom inference-only chip, designed with Broadcom and claimed to deliver about 50% lower cost per token. It closes with Jevons paradox: cheaper AI means more usage, not savings. FULL COVERAGE: the captions appear to cover the entire episode. All figures and product claims are as stated by the channel, not independently verified. Sponsor: none stated in the episode. Nothing here is investment advice.
Executive Summary (TL;DR)
For three years, OpenAI ran what Think School calls the most confusing business on Earth: the more it grew, the more it bled, because every ChatGPT answer is an inference cost and its best customers are its least profitable ones. The video breaks down the two traps - competition collapsing token prices a thousand-fold in three years, and the landlord problem of renting Nvidia chips and Microsoft data centers at a 75% gross margin to the landlords - and then the four comeback moves of the last 90 days: GPT-5.6 matching Claude Fable 5 at about a third of the cost, Codex exploding 500%, the GPT Work super app, and Halapino, a custom Broadcom-designed inference chip claimed to cut cost per token by about 50%. The catch is Jevons paradox: cheaper intelligence means more usage, not savings. FULL COVERAGE: the captions appear to cover the entire episode. All figures and product claims are as stated by the channel, not independently verified. Sponsor: none stated in the episode. Nothing here is investment advice.