OpenAI's US Ad Pilot Exceeds $100 Million In Annualized Revenue In Six Weeks (reuters.com)
- Reference: 0181143262
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/03/28/0231232/openais-us-ad-pilot-exceeds-100-million-in-annualized-revenue-in-six-weeks
- Source link: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/openais-us-ad-pilot-exceeds-100-million-annualized-revenue-six-weeks-2026-03-26/
> OpenAI's ChatGPT ads pilot in the United States has [1]crossed the $100 million annualized revenue mark within six weeks of launch , a company spokesperson said on Thursday, pointing to robust early demand for the AI startup's nascent advertising business. [...] While roughly 85% of users are currently eligible to see ads, fewer than 20% are shown ads daily, with considerable room to grow ad monetization within the existing user pool, the spokesperson said.
>
> "We're seeing no impact on consumer trust metrics, low dismissal rates of ads, and ongoing improvements in the relevance of ads as we learn from feedback," OpenAI said. The company plans to expand the test globally in additional countries in the coming weeks, including in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. OpenAI has now expanded to over 600 advertisers, with nearly 80% of small- and medium-sized businesses signaling interest in ChatGPT ads, the spokesperson said. The ChatGPT maker is set to launch self-serve advertiser capabilities in April to broaden access and drive further growth.
CEO Sam Altman [2]announced plans to begin testing ads on ChatGPT back in January after previously rejecting the idea. "I kind of think of ads as like a last resort for us as a business model," Altman [3]said in 2024.
Further reading: [4]OpenAI CFO Says Annualized Revenue Crosses $20 Billion In 2025
[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/openais-us-ad-pilot-exceeds-100-million-annualized-revenue-six-weeks-2026-03-26/
[2] https://slashdot.org/story/26/01/16/1827203/ads-are-coming-to-chatgpt-in-the-coming-weeks
[3] https://x.com/tomwarren/status/2012295849678602610?s=20
[4] https://devices.slashdot.org/story/26/01/19/2249208/openai-cfo-says-annualized-revenue-crosses-20-billion-in-2025
Low rate of ad dismissal my a$$ (Score:3)
Heh. Heheh. Hahah. HAHAHHA. As if the company will allow users to dismiss the ads any more than any other ad driven revenue model company.
I guess I donâ(TM)t really have a problem with this. I get it. Every single Internet company has a self stated evaluation that only makes consistent sense if its future revenue amounts to 10-times-global-GDP and their profits are all-teh-$$$$. Its a part of salesmanship thats rife in the industry. There are at least a hundred tech bro CEOs that are just as shameless about it as Altman
My take (Score:4, Interesting)
I am not a fan of ads, but will tolerate them if I find the content worthwhile and it is free, as in someone else is buying the beer. There are sites I like and do not block ads because I want them to be around, and in the end they either need to paywall or run ads to stay in business. If I pay for a site, then I want it ad free. That's the deal.
For sites like Netflix, with ads + subscription price, I need to decide where the value/cost trade off occurs. For some sites, it's cancel and forget about them, others pay at some level.
Unfortunately, ads are here to stay. The days of Archie, Veronica, Lynx are long gone...
Re: (Score:2)
> There are sites I like and do not block ads because I want them to be around, and in the end they either need to paywall or run ads to stay in business.
But the company whose ad it is has already paid to be shown on the site, hasn't it? Why should they care whether I choose to block ads via my browser? I'm never going to click on any as anyway.
About a factor of 150 too low (Score:3)
And that is just for them breaking even. Anybody thinks they can push ad revenue 150 times higher?
Trash your principles (Score:3)
> ... a last resort ...
Oh, Sam, we know you're not that ignorant: When your early investors demand bigger dividends, you'll trash your principles like yesterday's paper. You know, we know that.
Is this what SaaS CEOs have become: Salesmen who tell lies that everyone knows are lies, same as insurance industry CEOs. I guess, it was always so but now, you don't attempt to hide it behind the facts.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think he's lying, ads for them literally are a last resort, and that's exactly why they're using them right now.
Do they allow... (Score:3)
Do they allow ads for Gemini and others? Because, on top of ads in the first place, that could cause a significant customer loss.
Re: Do they allow... (Score:2)
Most mentions in them are ads. Given this huge rise in AI SEO bollocks it's unlikely what you're reading hasn't been gamed to suit a particular company. This is before the LLMs have even started to sell product placement.
Re: Do they allow... (Score:2)
I completely misread your question I'm sorry!
Re: (Score:2)
it's unlikely what you're reading hasn't been gamed to suit a particular company
Or politician, or political party, or other group of people whose interests generally don't match mine. I completely agree; this has been my assumption from the start, and certainly borne out by evidence over time. Unfortunately, most consumers are not very media-savvy, and advertisement systems are increasingly deceptive. Shaping audience perspectives must be one of the primary purposes of any vendor in the LLM space, w
Haven't seen one yet ... (Score:1)
... in my $20/mo account.
(Well, except very occasionally for their own services.)
Their business model might have an expiration date (Score:1)
in the end all those AI companies with their billion dollar valuations are just new ways of showing more adds to customers. what i dont really get is, how this is compatible with the way the economy is shifting: fewer and fewer wealthy individuals make up a higher and higher percentage of spending. ads seem less and less effective then. At some point the best way to increase your revenue will be to send a sales rep to a billionair...
What's the ROI then ? (Score:3, Insightful)
$100 billion invested
vs
$100 million p.a. income.
And that is, by Dirty Altman's own words, their "Last Resort".
Goodbye and good riddance.
Re: (Score:2)
> $100 billion invested vs $100 million p.a. income. And that is, by Dirty Altman's own words, their "Last Resort". Goodbye and good riddance.
Yea, 100 billion in Treasury Notes at 3.6 would be 36 billion. That's a high hurdle rate and basically zero risk; I'm guessing their hurdle rate is much higher and will be tough to clear.
Peanuts... (Score:2)
OpenAI's US Ad Pilot Exceeds $100 Million In Annualized Revenue In Six Weeks means the revenue in 6 weeks was about $10 million.
That's a rounding error - was it worth destroying the product image over? I almost wrote "and their reputation", but the deal with drunk Fox news-host currently roleplaying as a secretary of [1]a department that doesn't exist [military.com] that had [2]dipped into gutter already [techcrunch.com].
[1] https://www.military.com/feature/2025/10/17/department-of-war-not-legally-what-trumps-executive-order-really-does.html
[2] https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/02/chatgpt-uninstalls-surged-by-295-after-dod-deal/
Re: Peanuts... (Score:3)
In the end, the US government may be the largest AI customer.
eligible to see ads (Score:2)
WTF?
I hereby declare myself not eligible to see ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry sir, I am afraid you are not eligible to be non-eligible.
the question many are pondering now (Score:2)
so what does this actually mean for digital marketing? how do you even optimize to show up in an AI’s answers?
say I ask an LLM for a tool that does automated voice calls with speech-to-text -> LLM -> text-to-speech. it’ll spit out a shortlist. if that’s your product, how do you end up on it?
with google, at least we had a defined game: rankings, signals, tests, etc. this feels a lot fuzzier.
should be interesting times ahead for marketing.
This is easy, just use ad free AIs (Score:1)
Google and probably others will avoid them for a VERY long time.
And if not, there are many open source AIs we can run on our own machines.
And they will only continue to improve.
Just like adblockers, and Fluff Busting Purity, there are always solutions.
It's not our job to make them pay. We could even ask AI the best way to avoid them :)
Anthropic's Super Bowl ads addressed this issue! (Score:2)
Of course no one on Slashdot watches sports or ads, so let me point out...
Anthropic's Super Bowl ads were extremely well done IMHO, with just the right amount of 'pause'. Anthropic came to the Super Bowl party in ad form to make it clear Anthropic/Claude won't do ads.
[1]How can I communicate better with my mom [youtube.com]?
[2]Is my essay making a clear argument [youtube.com]?
[3]What do you think of my business idea [youtube.com]?
[4]Can I get a six pack quickly [youtube.com]?
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBSam25u8O4
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sVD3aG_azw
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De-_wQpKw0s
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQRu7DdTTVA
Scale (Score:2)
OpenAI lost $11,500,000,000 last year. There are 52 weeks in a year. $100,000,000 over 6 weeks is $866,666,666.67 per year; that's less than a billion. Even if that was just 20% of possible revenue, that's still just $4,333,333,333.33 per year. Meaning OpenAI would still be losing $7,166,666,666.67 per year. And that's assuming it doesn't lose users because of the ads.
Due to other market conditions, I'm predicting that the hyperscalers are all going to crash sometime in late 2028 and take the rest of the U
Re: (Score:2)
Unsure, I think the weak headline meant "If we multiplied what we made in 6 weeks to equal one year, that would total $100 M for the year."
Fuck This and Fuck Them (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuck ads.
Re: Fuck This and Fuck Them (Score:2)
Most lack the mental fortitude to stop paying/using over this
Re: (Score:2)
There are two issues here.
1) Ads are evil, they are a form of propaganda.
2) LLMs are ideally suited to be ad machines, unconstrained from reality.
OpenAI is desperate for revenue, to claw itself out of the gigantic debt hole that Altman has created. Whether this will work is unlikely, but the advertising move will produce much revenue initially. It will also make it obvious that LLMs are a waste of time, eventually, and a form of spam that should be outlawed.
Pandering to the money over the truth (Score:2)
Okay for the FP branch, but... I wonder if the rude Subject limited the scope of the discussion.
My take is that "love of money" is basically evil and always destroys any philosophic principles that get in the way. Love of money is a fake problem because there is no solution. There is no amount of money that can cure the sick "need" for infinite money. But only people with that sick love can wind up with the kind of sick money the richest people (claim to) have these years.
I do think "pandering" is a better
Fuck You (Score:2)
I find a lot of positive in advertisement.
I have found out about products I am interested in.
I have been entertained by advertisements and found some satisfyingly clever, and others laugh out loud amusing.
I would not give up those gems for an ad free world; which is really non-sensical concept anyway.
I have not mind giving a little of my time and attention in exchange for a product like a good song on the radio, my favorite television show, an internet search result, or free email service.
Yeah advertisement