Is the AI Bubble Cracking? OpenAI’s $100B Question

Everyone keeps asking the same thing:

Is the AI bubble about to burst?
Or are we already in the slow-motion version of it?

Let’s look at what’s actually happening — not the hype, not the fanboy threads, not the VC optimism.

Because the numbers are starting to look uncomfortable.

---

The Scale of the Commitments

OpenAI has reportedly signed infrastructure agreements totaling $1.4 trillion through 2033 with partners including:

• Microsoft
• Oracle
• Nvidia
• Amazon

Let that sink in.

This isn’t SaaS scaling.
This is industrial-scale compute dependency.

Now look at operating reality:

• 2025 revenue: $13B
• 2025 costs: $8B
• Projected 2028 operating loss (single year): $74B
• Cumulative projected losses by 2029: $115B

And right now?

OpenAI reportedly needs another $100B.

That’s when things start changing.

---

The “Everyone Is Reading the Fine Print” Phase

For the past few years, capital was flowing like it was 2021 again.
Now the tone has shifted.

Amazon

Originally framed as a $50B backing.
The structure has changed:

• $15B upfront
• $35B only if OpenAI IPOs or achieves AGI

That’s no longer blind conviction.
That’s conditional exposure.

---

Nvidia

Public messaging mentioned a $100B-scale investment narrative.
Later clarified as not a formal commitment.

Now negotiations reportedly center around:

• ~$30B
• Structured as equity
• With tighter terms

That’s not “AI moonshot.”
That’s balance sheet discipline.

---

Microsoft

Initial figures were discussed in high ranges.
Now expectations are described as “low billions” — roughly $2–3B territory.

Even for a hyperscaler, that signals restraint.

---

Why the Pullback?

Simple answer: liquidity pressure.

Look at partner balance sheets:

• Nvidia carries roughly $95B in near-term supply chain commitments.
• Amazon has ~$161B in obligations against ~$100B in cash.
• Microsoft, after operational commitments, isn’t sitting on unlimited deployable capital either.

These companies were comfortable saying “yes” when excess cash was abundant.

Now they are prioritizing.

---

The Nvidia Paradox

Here’s the irony.

Nvidia is arguably the only player consistently printing money from the AI boom. GPU margins reportedly hover around 35–40%.

Every hyperscaler dollar spent on AI compute largely flows toward Nvidia.

But Nvidia’s capital isn’t idle.

They need it to:

• Secure fabrication capacity
• Prepay manufacturing pipelines
• Lock supply chains

They benefit from AI expansion — but they can’t casually redirect capital into funding model developers.

---

Competitive Pressure Is Real

Carnegie Invest reportedly described OpenAI as one of the more fragile large AI hyperscale players:

• High capital intensity
• Weaker structural moats compared to infrastructure giants

Meanwhile:

• DeepSeek R1 reportedly matched performance at dramatically lower cost profiles
• Anthropic continues advancing aggressively
• Microsoft integrated Claude into Copilot

Benchmarks increasingly show ChatGPT landing second or third in several categories.

That doesn’t mean decline.
But it does mean dominance isn’t guaranteed.

Reports even suggested an internal “code red” period in late 2025.

When growth companies start using crisis language internally, you know pressure exists.

---

Ads in ChatGPT?

Sam Altman previously signaled that ads inside ChatGPT would be a negative signal.

Now?

Advertising is openly discussed.

That shift alone tells you the margin pressure is real.

When subscription revenue isn’t enough to fund compute burn, monetization strategies expand.

---

IPO: Victory or Necessity?

An IPO — Initial Public Offering — is when a private company goes public and sells shares to retail and institutional investors.

Historically:

IPO = celebration.

In this case?

IPO may equal:

Access to fresh capital from public markets
Instead of private mega-checks from hyperscalers

This isn’t about ringing a bell on Wall Street.

It’s about runway.

---

Will OpenAI Survive?

Most likely, yes.

They have:

• Brand power
• Developer ecosystem
• Strategic relevance

But survival and dominance are different outcomes.

The bigger question is:

Who funds the next $100B?

Because capital cycles have changed.

Investors are no longer signing blank checks.
They’re attaching milestones.

And if that next round doesn’t fully close?

Well…

You might finally get your RAM back.