This startup spends $400k/month on Anthropic
A startup founder reveals they spend $400,000 per month on Anthropic while spending nothing on OpenAI. They argue Anthropic has been outexecuting OpenAI, particularly for enterprise and workflow automation, despite crediting OpenAI with pioneering the AI lab model. The transcript ends mid-sentence hinting at a critique about stated versus revealed preferences.
Summary
In this brief but candid transcript, a startup founder or executive discloses that their company spends approximately $400,000 per month on Anthropic's AI services while allocating zero budget to OpenAI. This significant spending figure serves as the backdrop for a comparative analysis of the two leading AI companies.
The speaker offers a nuanced take on the reputational and philosophical standing of each company. They acknowledge OpenAI as spiritually more 'pure' in the sense that it originated and defined the concept of an AI lab as a commercial entity. In contrast, they characterize Anthropic as having been founded by disgruntled OpenAI employees who had concerns about management direction, profitability, and ethics — framing Anthropic's origin as reactive rather than pioneering.
Despite this more critical framing of Anthropic's origins, the speaker argues that Anthropic has clearly been outexecuting OpenAI in terms of product quality, particularly from an enterprise and workflow automation standpoint. They suggest OpenAI needs to improve and 'lock in' to remain competitive.
The transcript cuts off mid-sentence as the speaker begins referencing the concept of 'stated preference versus revealed preference,' suggesting they were about to make a pointed observation — likely that OpenAI's stated reputation or preference among the broader public contrasts with what companies actually choose to use (i.e., Anthropic) when making real purchasing decisions.
Key Insights
- The speaker's company spends $400,000 per month on Anthropic and $0 on OpenAI, making their vendor choice a strong real-world signal of product preference.
- The speaker credits OpenAI as spiritually more 'pure' because it originated and defined the concept of an AI lab as a commercial company.
- The speaker characterizes Anthropic's founding as rooted in employee dissatisfaction with OpenAI's management, direction, and ethical stance — framing it as reactive rather than visionary.
- Despite its origins, the speaker argues Anthropic has been outexecuting OpenAI with a product that is better in every category, especially for enterprise and workflow automation use cases.
- The speaker begins invoking the 'stated preference versus revealed preference' framework, implying that OpenAI may be widely praised in public discourse but that actual enterprise purchasing decisions favor Anthropic.
Topics
Transcript
[0:00] We spend maybe like $400,000 per month on Anthropic and $0 on OpenAI at the moment. But, I think that spiritually like OpenAI is, I guess, a little more pure because they kind of created, you know, this idea of like a AI lab as a company. And Anthropic is a result of employees that didn't like the management or the direction. There were complaints about profit and ethics and all this other stuff. Anthropic, frankly speaking, has been out executing OpenAI. Their product's much better in every category, at least from an enterprise or like workflow automation perspective. So, OpenAI needs to lock in. I'm going to get in trouble for this, probably, [0:31] but this might be…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from 20VC with Harry Stebbings
Tokens Over Humans?
A tech leader argues that by end of 2025, companies will prioritize allocating budget to AI tokens over hiring additional engineers. Drawing from his experience at Adobe, he predicts a fundamental shift from headcount-based budgets to flexible spending budgets where leaders choose between humans and AI compute.
"Loosing money is like s*x"
A fast-paced financial and tech discussion covering major funding rounds including Anthropic's $65B raise, a resurgence in public markets, and growing skepticism from Uber and Microsoft about AI productivity gains. The conversation touches on the shift from capex-light to capex-heavy business models and bold predictions about AI replacing human developers.
Why we should increase capital gains tax
The speaker argues that capital gains taxes, particularly on short-term gains, are preferable to income taxes because they do not significantly disincentivize investment behavior. They suggest a tax paradigm shift toward taxing things that don't negatively impact economic incentives. The transcript cuts off before the full argument is completed.
The $10B Startup Running on AI Agents
A company spending over $10B reveals that its AI agent token costs now exceed total employee salaries. The company runs multiple AI agents for project management and interviews, using evaluations to optimize model selection and inference spend. This token-over-headcount trend is expected to accelerate significantly across the enterprise.
Why AI Won't Take Your Job
The transcript argues that AI will not eliminate jobs, drawing on 250 years of economic history to counter fears of technological unemployment. The speaker highlights that productivity has increased 25x without causing net job loss, attributing recurring fears to the 'lump of labor fallacy.' Historical technology revolutions are cited as evidence that innovation creates rather than destroys employment.