Will OpenAI’s IPO's be the biggest in history?

Creatix / October 7, 2025

OpenAI has not publicly announced plans for an initial public offering (IPO). But the scale of its newly signed compute deals and its current losses make a blockbuster capital raise through an IPO increasingly likely. Any such IPO could challenge all-time records if ChatGPT and its parent company keep current execution and future expectations on track.

OpenAI—the creator of ChatGPT—has secured unprecedented compute capacity across the industry through deals with NVIDIA, AMD, CoreWeave, and its own “Stargate” data-center program. The explosive adoption and cultural ubiquity of ChatGPT provide powerful demand-side momentum to justify this scale. These commitments lock in the compute needed for ChatGPT to keep expanding its “magic,” but they also concentrate execution risk across chips, power, construction, software, and demand. Because OpenAI is currently operating at a loss, it will need to raise substantial capital to fund these obligations—making an IPO a plausible path, potentially the largest by market value in history if growth and supply milestones line up (Financial Times).

---

What’s actually been signed

• NVIDIA × OpenAI — ≥10 GW + up to $100B investment.
  Multi-year pact to build at least 10 GW of AI data centers using NVIDIA systems, with the first 1 GW in 2H 2026 on the Vera Rubin platform. NVIDIA intends to invest up to $100B in OpenAI, phased as each gigawatt is deployed. (OpenAI)

• AMD × OpenAI — 6 GW + equity warrants.
  Multi-generation agreement for 6 GW of Instinct GPUs, starting with 1 GW in 2H 2026, plus warrants giving OpenAI the right to buy ~10% of AMD (~160M shares) at $0.01 if delivery and performance milestones are met. (Analysts ambiguously characterize AMD's revenue opportunity (and OpenAI's liability) in the "tens of billions" if fully executed.) (OpenAI)

• CoreWeave × OpenAI — ~$22.4B contracted capacity.
  Three 2025 tranches: $11.9B (Mar), $4B (May), $6.5B (Sep) → ~$22.4B total, providing operated GPU blocks OpenAI can light up quickly (and must utilize). (CoreWeave)

• Stargate (OpenAI + Oracle + SoftBank) — toward $500B / ~10 GW.
  With five new U.S. sites announced, the program targets ~10 GW with up to $500B in investment over time. Broader tallies across OpenAI’s compute arrangements (NVIDIA /AMD /Oracle/ CoreWeave) put total computing deals near $1T over the coming decade. (OpenAI)

---

Financial reality check: OpenAI is operating at a loss

• Operating at a loss: Reporting in 2025 points to multi-billion-dollar operating losses; some coverage pegs ~$10B losses this year as capex ramps. (Financial Times)

• Capital expenditures excced cash flow: Reuters estimates >$100B in spend before projected profitability (late 2020s), underscoring the need for external financing to fund chips, sites, and pre-pays. (Reuters)

• Revenue trending up but dwarfed by commitments: Various reports cite multi-billion 2025 revenue run-rates that are still tiny when compared to the almost $1T in commitments and the possibility of even more contracts and commitments in the coming weeks. 

Implication: OpenAI will likely need fresh capital (equity, converts, structured project finance) to cover its incredibly aggressive commitments. 

---

Why an IPO must be on the table

• Scale + liquidity needs: Private rounds can bridge near-term spend. However, decade-long, $10s–$100s of billions in staged obligations usually require public-market depth. (Financial Times)

• Modelable catalysts: NVIDIA’s up to $100B commitment and AMD’s warrants give public investors concrete milestones; CoreWeave contracts provide a visible utilization path. (OpenAI)

• Record-setting potential: If OpenAI delivers on-time energization of Stargate sites, steady NVIDIA/AMD fleet ramps, and improving perf/$, an IPO could plausibly compete for the largest/most valuable in history by listing market cap. (Analytical inference based on the cited deal sizes.) (Financial Times)

---

Where “default” risk comes from without a huge IPO

• Financing default: If markets tighten while $22.4B (CoreWeave), $500B (Stargate trajectory), and 10–16 GW of chip roadmaps come due, missed payments or renegotiations could forfeit options (e.g., AMD warrants) and dent credibility. (CoreWeave)

• Delivery default: 1-GW tranches from NVIDIA/AMD slated for 2H 2026 only create value if powered halls/interconnects are ready on schedule. Slips → penalties & rescheduling. (OpenAI)

• Utilization default: Under-drawing CoreWeave blocks triggers make-whole dynamics; idle racks magnify losses. (CoreWeave)

• Performance default: If ROCm lags or packaging/network bottlenecks hit GB200/Vera Rubin systems, throughput/latency miss SLA and training slips. (Reuters)

---

Risk-mitigating signals to watch

• Capital cadence: Structured equity/convert + project finance tied to specific sites, with transparent use-of-proceeds to energization. (Watch for syndicates aligned to each GW.) (Reuters)

• Stargate milestones: Permits issued, interconnects signed, substations under construction, energization dates hit. (OpenAI)

• Chip delivery + software maturity: Steady Vera Rubin/GB200 landings and MI450 fleets running production workloads with competitive perf/$ and stable ROCm. (OpenAI)

• Utilization: Visible draw on CoreWeave blocks (and Oracle/SoftBank sites) matching booked capacity. (CoreWeave)

---

Bottom line

OpenAI’s deal stack carries explicit dollar values and multi-GW targets at a historic scale: up to $100B from NVIDIA tied to ≥10 GW, 6 GW with AMD plus warrants, ~$22.4B with CoreWeave, and a Stargate trajectory framed around ~$500B and ~10 GW—with some tallies placing total compute deals near $1T over the decade. That ambition, paired with ongoing losses, practically ensures the need to raise capital. The needs may exceed what private markets can or are willing to finance. OpenAI and investment banks will surely consider going for what could be the biggest IPO in history. You have to strike it while it's hot and before the "bubble" bursts. An IPO announcement in the coming months is likely. 

• Financial Times
• Reuters
• Reuters

Open AI's Financial Strategy is nothing new.

The "sign now/finance later" strategy is quite common in capital-intensive industries.

1. Airline mega-orders
   Airlines routinely place multi-year orders for hundreds of jets (with options) long before they have cash in hand. Deliveries are staggered; financing is a mix of operating leases, export-credit, and sale-leasebacks. Similar: capacity reserved years out, penalties for deferrals. Different: aircraft have deep secondary markets; GPUs/datacenters are more bespoke and depreciate faster.

2. Telecom spectrum auctions & 5G build-outs
   Carriers bid billions for spectrum, then raise debt/equity and invest over years to build networks that monetize later. Similar: regulatory milestones + capex before revenue; credibility with vendors is crucial. Different: spectrum is a scarce, durable asset; AI capacity ages quickly and is vendor-roadmap dependent.

3. LNG / large energy projects (project finance)
   Developers sign long-term offtake contracts (take-or-pay) with buyers first, then use those contracts to raise non-recourse debt and reach FID, building multi-billion-dollar plants. Similar: contracts anchor financing; stepwise milestones. Different: commodity demand is established; AI demand curves and unit economics are still evolving.

4. Utility PPAs & gigawatt renewables
   Utilities or corporates sign 10–20 year PPAs before the solar/wind farm is financed or built. The PPA backstops project finance. Similar: “paper first, capital second.” Different: power output is predictable; AI workloads vary in intensity and quality requirements.

5. Automotive battery offtake deals
   EV makers lock in multi-year cathode/lithium supply and future gigafactory capacity, often with prepayments or equity links. Similar: multi-year technology roadmaps, supplier co-investment, warrants. Different: battery chemistries evolve slower than AI chip generations.

6. Hyperscale cloud pre-commitments
   SaaS or consumer platforms commit to vast reserved instances with clouds to secure price/performance, then race to fill them with users/workloads. Similar: capacity reservations with utilization risk. Different: OpenAI is both the infra buyer and (in part) the demand generator.

7. Real-estate pre-sales & construction loans
   Developers pre-sell units or sign anchor tenants, then use those contracts to draw construction financing. Similar: demand proof used to unlock capital; staged draws. Different: buildings last decades; AI infra can be leapfrogged in 12–24 months.

8. Mining “offtake” + streaming/royalty financing
   Miners secure offtake with smelters/traders, then raise capital against future production. Similar: contract-anchored financing; commodity-linked warrants. Different: mines have geologic risk; AI has performance/software ecosystem risk.

9. Pharma manufacturing slots & CMOs
   Biotech firms reserve scarce bioreactor capacity years ahead, funded by milestone equity raises. Similar: scarce, specialized capacity; milestone-based payments. Different: pharma demand hinges on binary trial outcomes; AI demand is broader but price-elastic.

10. Defense LRIP (low-rate initial production)
    Contractors get multi-year awards with options; cash flows through milestones while factories/tooling are stood up. Similar: government-backed schedules, heavy capex before volume. Different: defense demand is policy-insulated; AI is market-driven and competitive.

How the examples above map to OpenAI’s playbook

• Reserve scarce inputs early (chips, power, operated capacity), even while loss-making.

• Use those signed commitments to catalyze financing (equity, converts, structured/project debt).

• Stagger deliveries/milestones to align cash needs with ramping demand.

• Add demand hedges (consumer apps, platform/ecosystem) to keep utilization high.

Key differences (why AI is trickier)

• Faster tech half-life (12–24 month chip cycles vs. 10–20 year utilities).

• Software stack maturity risk (drivers, compilers, orchestration) can throttle hardware ROI.

• Demand is elastic and regulation-sensitive (trust/safety, copyright, privacy).

• Limited secondary markets for last-gen accelerators compared with planes or spectrum.

Financial Engineering rules of thumb for doing this safely

• Tie capacity tranches to energized site milestones and verified performance $ gates.

• Keep dual-vendor and portability options (avoid single-roadmap exposure).

• Blend take-or-pay with flexible “call options” on extra capacity.

• Match long-dated liabilities with long-dated contracted revenue (enterprise commits, platform fees).

• Publish internal SLA + eval dashboards so performance risk is discoverable early.

Bottom line: OpenAI’s approach rhymes with how airlines, telcos, energy developers, and EV makers secure scarce inputs ahead of cash, and then finance against those commitments. The upside is privileged access and scale; the downside is negative operating leverage if timelines slip or demand underperforms.

What is the Biggest IPO in History and Why OpenAI can Beat it?

Biggest IPO so far: Saudi Aramco (2019) — it raised $25.6B at listing, later lifted to $29.4B after exercising the greenshoe, the all-time record for IPO proceeds. (Brookings)

Why OpenAI’s could beat it (in theory):

• Valuation runway: Recent reporting pegs OpenAI’s private valuation around $500B after a secondary sale. Even a modest float at that level could top Aramco’s proceeds:
  • 5% float of $500B ≈ $25B (near Aramco base)
  • 6% ≈ $30B (beats Aramco’s $29.4B record)
  If momentum or new funding lifts valuation toward ~$1T over time, a 3–5% float would equate to $30–$50B+. (Reuters)

• Capital need + mega-deals: OpenAI has lined up multi-gigawatt compute with NVIDIA, AMD, CoreWeave, and its Stargate sites—commitments discussed in reporting at hundreds of billions over the next decade—which likely requires public-market scale financing. That creates a credible setup for a very large IPO. (Reuters)

• Investor appetite for category leaders: Aramco and Alibaba show that dominant, once-a-generation stories can clear record books when market conditions cooperate. (Renaissance Capital)

Caveat: IPO size depends on both valuation and the percentage of shares sold, plus market conditions at pricing. OpenAI would need strong execution on its 2026+ milestones (sites energized, chip deliveries, improving unit economics) to support record-scale proceeds. (Reuters)

Now you know it. 

www.creatix.one

forlosers.com (losing ignorance...)