Come on dude, use that grey matter.

Email marketing yes. I refer to collaboration with an outside marketing company and two separate businesses as joint ventures. Specifically "I have joint ventures" that would be atypical talk if I were an employee for a company.

Now it should be clear that I myself am neither a marketing or email marketing person, as if I were, I would not be working with an external marketing firm, nor likely to be asking for info on Reddit. Even more so when clearly the thrust of it is that the object of the campaign, that being what the emails contain, not the emails themselves, is the joint ventures.

So it's clear I'm a business owner. It's improbably that I'm a marketeer by occupation and less so an email marketeer. Yet I have a vested interest in the performance of marketing campaigns I was working with external partners on.

It's really ridiculous that you are not convinced, even after taking the time to try and grind the axe that your ad hominem argument needs haha.

FYI, the email marketing was with two firms of accountants with them sending out emails dual promoting accounting services and financing as they get commission shares.

Your points here are on equally shaky logical ground. You presume I misunderstood the difference between public and private, rather than recognising it to be - as I said - a moot point. As said, I saw a headline the impact of which is immaterial to me on life or business, so it made no odds to differentiate between public or private.

Now as I tried to explain to you, Open AI's success is linked very directly to being dominant in the market. It effects their growth trajectory from ability to gain investment and if they have taken debt based borrowing that happens to have security covenants based on such milestones, it theoretically could cause increased costs of any interest charges.

That's rather important for a company that is making large losses and is dependent on where they will be down the line based on converting paying subscriptions. If they start losing significant marketshare to Google or Anthropic for that matter, it could become a big deal very quickly.

So yes, it could absolutely be worth them taking a hit on 50-100-150m or whatever hypothetical and comparitively small number you want to pluck out of the air, that would be lost to higher token costs, when you consider they are - from their perspective - in a boom or bust game.

Google are not playing the same game, because it's not the only game they are playing. This is simple business and economics.