A wave of discontent is brewing among early backers of OpenAI, with some investors publicly questioning the artificial intelligence start-up’s sky-high valuation amid what they perceive as a scattered and unfocused strategy. The Financial Times first reported the grievances, which center on OpenAI’s decision to pivot towards enterprise sales—a space where it currently lags behind rival Anthropic—while simultaneously shelving several ambitious projects. Critics argue that the company, which boasts over 1 billion users for its ChatGPT product, should double down on its consumer success rather than chasing new revenue streams that dilute its core mission.
Valuation questions and investor skepticism
OpenAI’s current valuation stands at approximately $852 billion (£628 billion), a figure that some early investors now consider unjustifiably high. The company recently completed a massive funding round that reportedly valued it at $157 billion, but the latest criticisms suggest that even that number may be under pressure. One unnamed early backer voiced frustration: “You have ChatGPT, a 1 billion-user business growing 50-100 per cent a year. What are you doing talking about enterprise and code? It’s a deeply unfocused company.” This sentiment echoes the concerns of other investors who fear that OpenAI is squandering its dominant position in the generative AI market.
The comparison with Anthropic, a rival AI startup valued at $380 billion, has become a recurring theme in the criticism. An investor who has backed both firms noted that any new investment into OpenAI’s most recent funding round would need to assume an IPO valuation of $1.2 trillion or more. That threshold, they argued, becomes harder to justify given that buying into Anthropic offers a cheaper proposition with arguably sharper strategic focus. Anthropic has carved a niche in enterprise AI solutions, particularly its Claude models, and has won over customers looking for safety-first, reliable AI tools—an area where OpenAI’s reputation has been marred by occasional controversies.
Strategic shifts and project cancellations
OpenAI’s recent strategic pivots have been dramatic. The company shut down its video generation tool, Sora, which had been in development for months and was expected to challenge platforms like RunwayML and Pika. The closure of Sora reportedly led to the cancellation of a $1 billion investment from Disney, a deal that would have integrated OpenAI’s video AI into Disney’s content production pipeline. Investors saw this as a missed opportunity to lock in a lucrative entertainment partnership.
Another controversial move was OpenAI’s purchase of tech talk show TBPN. One investor described the acquisition as “a distraction,” arguing that content production is far removed from the core AI research and product development that made OpenAI a household name. The company also scrapped plans for an “adult” chatbot, which had raised ethical concerns but was nonetheless viewed by some as a potential new revenue stream. Additionally, OpenAI drastically pared back an investment deal with Nvidia, scaling down what could have been a multi-billion-dollar commitment to acquire GPUs for training models. This is particularly puzzling given the current global shortage of high-end AI chips.
Infrastructure plans have also been scaled back. OpenAI halted plans to build a $30 billion data centre in the UK, a project that was intended to support European expansion. The company also paused extensions to an existing site in Abilene, Texas. These moves signal a retreat from the aggressive infrastructure buildout that many analysts consider essential for maintaining a competitive edge in AI. Critics argue that without sufficient computing capacity, OpenAI will struggle to train the next generation of models, potentially handing the lead to rivals like Anthropic and Google, which have secured substantial compute resources.
Enterprise push and competition with Anthropic
Instead of pursuing consumer or entertainment ventures, OpenAI has refocused its efforts on enterprise sales, particularly through its Codex coding tool. Codex, which helps developers write code using natural language prompts, is being marketed directly to businesses. However, this puts OpenAI in direct competition with Anthropic, which has already established strong relationships with enterprise clients. Anthropic’s Claude model is seen by many businesses as more reliable and less prone to generating harmful or nonsensical outputs, a critical factor in risk-averse corporate environments.
Jai Das, president of investment firm Sapphire Ventures, who is not an investor in either OpenAI or Anthropic, drew a historical parallel. He referred to OpenAI as potentially “the Netscape of AI,” referencing the browser company that dominated the late 1990s internet landscape but was eventually overtaken by Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and later acquired by AOL. The analogy is sobering: Netscape had first-mover advantage and a strong product, but a lack of focus on the right business model and competition from a more integrated player doomed it. Das’s comment suggests that without a clear, unwavering strategy, OpenAI could suffer the same fate.
Infrastructure advantages and CFO defense
Despite the criticism, OpenAI retains significant strengths. The company holds a strong lead over Anthropic in procurement of computing resources, thanks in part to its deep partnership with Microsoft, which provides access to Azure’s vast cloud infrastructure. OpenAI also enjoys a first-mover advantage with ChatGPT, which still commands the largest user base in the consumer AI space. The scale of its user data gives it a moat in training data that is hard for competitors to replicate.
OpenAI’s chief financial officer, Sarah Friar, pushed back against the negative sentiment. She pointed to the company’s large recent funding round as evidence of investor confidence. “Our latest raise demonstrates that the market believes in our vision and our ability to execute,” Friar said in a statement. However, the anonymous complaints from early backers suggest that not all investors share that view, and that the path forward may require more discipline.
The situation highlights the challenges facing AI companies as they transition from research labs to profit-driven enterprises. OpenAI must balance the need to innovate with the demands of investors who want a clear, profitable roadmap. The coming months will reveal whether the company can course-correct or whether the criticisms will deepen into a full-blown crisis of confidence. One thing is clear: in the fast-moving AI race, focus is not just a virtue—it is a survival mechanism.
Source:Silicon UK News