[aurareturn]

They have some moat. I'm not sure what it is. But they do.

I've been a ChatGPT subscriber since the beginning. I've been a subscriber even though Sonnet 3.5 and others have surpassed GPT4o. I'm not sure why I don't switch.

I think it's the combination of better UX (Claude has poor UX apps), cool interesting new features, and having (limited) access to the top models.

[weatherlite]

OK, I agree with this, they have a bit of a moat but nothing particularly strong. They definitely don't deserve a 130B valuation imo, I'm expecting subscription prices to be pushed down since everyone and his sister are going to offer similarly strong models.

[aurareturn]

I disagree. I think their valuation is justified. They're growing very fast.

Subscription prices won't go down. If anything, they seem to be going up.

I don't think having the smartest model or the model that is benching the best is going to knock ChatGPT out at this point. It's the whole thing. The function calling, the tool use, the ecosystem, etc.

[weatherlite]

> I don't think having the smartest model or the model that is benching the best is going to knock ChatGPT out at this point.

It will be a question of price and performance. Many many companies aren't on board any A.I flow yet and they will need to choose what to do in the coming years. Those who chose OpenAI might stick regardless of what happens because it may be a hassle to switch but I kinda doubt its that sticky. It's not like moving clouds. And anyway we are really only in the beginning. OpenAI had a very nice head start which is over now, I will be very surprised if their market share doesn't drop significantly in the coming 2-3 years.

[aurareturn]

I just feel like it's not that ChatGPT's 4o is the smartest. It's the capabilities such as document uploading, deep research, image generation, voice chat, etc that give them the stickiness.

I know 4o isn't the smartest but I still had almost no desire to switch to Claude or Google.