Damodaran:AI 万亿美元市场的前提是取代人类工作
The $10-$15 trillion total addressable market for AI, if it is successful, is actually "terrifying".
纽约大学斯特恩商学院教授 Aswath Damodaran 称,AI 若成功对应 10 万亿至 15 万亿美元的可寻址市场,这个数字其实“令人恐惧”,因为该规模只有在 AI 取代人类工作、而非仅作为工具时才能实现。他警告,若这一情景成真,半数白领将失业,社会将面临收入与人生意义双重流失的问题。
主题
查看原帖纽约大学教授阿斯沃斯·达摩达兰(“估值院长”)发表了一篇长文博客,称Anthropic的IPO将按年化收入定价,而非基于现金流进行估值。 > 要为Anthropic论证1.5万亿至2万亿美元的估值,需要极快的早期增长、营业利润率升至30%或以上、算力成本增速慢于收入,以及随着监管和商业模式趋于稳定、风险降至平均水平。 > 2026年上半年,Anthropic亏损87亿美元、OpenAI亏损216亿美元(不含非现金费用),这排除了盈利倍数的可能,使ARR成为AI领域等同于互联网泡沫时期“眼球数”和社交媒体“用户数”的指标。 > ARR没有统一标准:OpenAI的500亿美元按净额计入合作伙伴销售额,Anthropic的650亿美元则按总额计入,而将OpenAI按总额上调后,就得出了投资者流传的约700亿美元数字。两者都按月年化,而这一选择双方都可以改变。 > 这里的风投轮次是在为IPO定价,而非为业务估值:Anthropic的5月轮融资以9650亿美元投后估值募资650亿美元,而当时预期的IPO定价为1.15万亿美元,这是对延迟或失望的折价。 > 定价很可能会转向2030年或2036年的收入和盈利,届时25倍的2036年盈利看起来便宜,但只有在错误地与当前盈利的当下倍数相比较时才会如此。 > 哪家实验室更便宜取决于衡量标准:在1.5万亿至2万亿美元估值下,按当前和年末ARR看Anthropic更便宜,按2030年收入、算力和用户看OpenAI更便宜,而两者可能都只是定价过高。 > 市场上不存在已上市的纯业务可比公司,因为Gemini隶属于Alphabet,xAI隶属于SpaceX,Muse隶属于Meta,因此Anthropic将参照OpenAI的私募轮次或Mag 7和SpaceX来定价。
查看原文
NYU professor Aswath Damodaran ("Dean of Valuation"), published a long blog and says Anthropic’s IPO will be priced on run-rate revenue rather than valued on cash flows. > Justifying a $1.5T to $2T value for Anthropic requires very fast early growth, operating margins rising to 30% or more, compute costs growing slower than revenue, and risk falling to average as regulation and business models settle. > H1 2026 losses of $8.7B at Anthropic and $21.6B at OpenAI, excluding non-cash charges, rule out earnings multiples, making ARR the AI equivalent of dot-com eyeballs and social-media user counts. > ARR has no standard: OpenAI’s $50B counts partner sales net, Anthropic’s $65B counts them gross, and grossing up OpenAI produced the roughly $70B figure investors circulated. Both annualize monthly, a choice either can change. > VC rounds here price the IPO rather than value the business: Anthropic’s May round raised $65B at $965B post-money when expected IPO pricing was $1.15T, a haircut for delay or disappointment. > Pricing will likely migrate to 2030 or 2036 revenue and earnings, where 25 times 2036 earnings looks cheap only when wrongly compared with today’s multiples on current earnings. > The cheaper lab depends on the yardstick: at $1.5T to $2T, Anthropic looks cheaper on current and year-end ARR, OpenAI on 2030 revenue, compute and users, and both may simply be overpriced. > No listed pure-play peer exists, since Gemini sits inside Alphabet, xAI inside SpaceX and Muse inside Meta, so Anthropic will be priced against OpenAI’s private rounds or the Mag 7 and SpaceX.
正文
The $10-$15 trillion total addressable market for AI, if it is successful, is actually "terrifying".
- The famous "Dean of Valuation", Professor Aswath Damodaran, of NYU Stern School of Business.
The reason: AI as a tool is a much smaller market; AI as a replacement for human-jobs is where the giant market story comes from.
"The best-case scenario for AI, that $10 to $15 trillion market, will happen if ONLY it replaces people.
If AI is a tool, it’s going to be a much smaller market than if AI replaces people. So, the stories we’re telling about $10, $20 or $25 trillion markets are actually terrifying stories for the rest of the world.
Why? Because if that story comes true, half of all white-collar people are going to lose their jobs. And what are they going to do instead? Who’s going to come up with the income to buy the products and services?
If AI works as well as it’s supposed to and replaces people, how do we deal with that as a society? Because people lose their jobs. Not only do you lose your income, you lose your life’s meaning.."
----
Full video on "Excess Returns" podcast Youtube channel (link in comment)