Anthropic Nears Deal To Raise Funding at $170 Billion Valuation (bloomberg.com)
- Reference: 0178504884
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/07/29/1642226/anthropic-nears-deal-to-raise-funding-at-170-billion-valuation
- Source link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-29/anthropic-nears-deal-to-raise-funding-at-170-billion-valuation
> Anthropic is nearing a deal to raise as much as $5 billion in a new round of funding that would [1]value the AI startup at $170 billion , according to a person familiar with the matter. Investment firm Iconiq Capital is leading the round, which is expected to total between $3 billion and $5 billion, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private information.
>
> Anthropic has also been in discussions with the Qatar Investment Authority and Singapore's sovereign fund GIC about participating in the round, the person said. The new financing would mark a significant jump in valuation for the company and cement its status as one of world's leading AI developers. Anthropic was valued at $61.5 billion in a $3.5 billion round led by Lightspeed Venture Partners earlier this year.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-29/anthropic-nears-deal-to-raise-funding-at-170-billion-valuation
$170B (Score:2)
I think about all the shit I could buy with $170B. Damn!
So what kind of earnings does this company have? Anything? How do they get to $170B?
Re: (Score:2)
It's another classic tech bubble. It will burst too.
Re: $170B (Score:2)
Waitin' on the pop!
Re:$170B (Score:4, Insightful)
The LHC cost 5 billion. Let that sink in for a moment.
Re:$170B [on the red gas pedal] (Score:2)
Imaginary money, fantasy-based valuations, and a friction-free stock market accelerating without apparent limit as ever faster trades occur in ever larger volumes.
What could possibly go wrong with any of that?
Why did I want a red gas pedal? It's one of the betting colors for roulette. Both kinds?
Re: (Score:2)
Valuations aren't worth all that much. Enron went from being worth more (adjusting for inflation) to nothing in a span of months. The people insisting the company is worth that much are the same ones who plowed billions of dollars into the company hoping they'll be the next Microsoft or Google. The company doesn't actually need to be either for them to make money off of their investment as long as they can convince someone else that it's worth that much.
This isn't about washing money (there are far bette
It's just like how you should look at AI... (Score:2)
According to one genius, it's not how good the AI is today, but how much faster it's getting better. I mean, there are some regressions here and there and by every metric it's an overall net negative every time it's used, and it mostly seems to be used for search because google search is just that bad, but some very smart and lazy people have said it's getting better super dupe fasterer.
In that same light, you shouldn't consider how profitable they are today, but how much faster they are burning through cas
Re: It's just like how you should look at AI... (Score:2)
Valuation based on *alleged* potential value is for suckers. If only we could get fifty more GPUs, it'll work we promise!
Ushering a new era (Score:1)
Soon people everywhere will no longer be limited by insufficient coding knowledge and gain immediate beginner to intermediate coding competency.
Anthropic may just be the next big thing in tech investing.
I'd recommend anyone with ideas and inability to code to try Claude Code. It is quite spectacularly good if you consider that it allows someone with 0 coding knowledge to describe a program or script they want and Claude will make it a reality.
Of all the AI available today for coding Anthropic's Claud
Re: (Score:3)
Soon people everywhere will no longer be limited by insufficient coding knowledge and gain immediate beginner to intermediate coding competency.
"AI" does not give anyone "coding competency". If someone doesn't know how to code, they still won't know anything about how to code by using the "AI" to do it for them. And, the "AI" is confidently incorrect quite a lot of the time, and there's no changing that because LLMs only predict the next word, they don't have any actual skill. It's like the blind lead
Link without paywall (Score:4, Informative)
Stories behind a paywall should not be acceptable on Slashdot.
Here is a link to the story without a paywall:
[1]https://au.investing.com/news/... [investing.com]
[1] https://au.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/anthropic-nears-5-billion-funding-deal-at-170-billion-valuation--bloomberg-93CH-3948031
Qatar (Score:3)
The GDP of Qatar is about $220B -- just slightly more than what they think one of many AI companies is worth?
Good luck with that, guys.
Re: (Score:2)
It is worth whatever a sucker will may for it.
What does valuation mean? (Score:2)
In a market with multitudes of buyers, there is a smooth distribution of prices that those buyers would pay. In those markets, an average or median price is understandable. However, if there is only a small number of buyers and most of those buyers are not already declared or obvious, the distribution is much harder to understand. If one buyer is willing to pay one amount, but that buyer is the only known buyer, what is the valuation? It's not just a problem with a small sample size struggling to estima
Explains the Caps. (Score:2)
Probably were told no one would buy if they did not put in the usage caps. I bet it was 'acceptable' losses to the founders when the company was private. But the business geniuses looked and it and said nope.