OpenAI has been prominently featured in recent news, whether it’s concerning acquisitions, rivalry with Anthropic, or larger discussions regarding AI’s societal effects.

In the most recent episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Kirsten Korosec, Sean O’Kane, and I endeavored to compile all the current OpenAI updates. While the company’s recent acquisitions appear to be typical acqui-hires, Sean pointed out that they also tackle “two significant existential issues that OpenAI is presently attempting to solve.”

To begin with, with the acquisition of the team from personal finance startup Hiro, the company might be aiming to create a product that offers “more engagement than merely a chatbot, and possibly something more valuable.” Additionally, with new media startup TBPN, OpenAI could be seeking to “enhance its public image, which has recently not been favorable.”

Read a summary of our discussion, adjusted for brevity and clarity below.

Anthony: [We have] two transactions worth discussing; one is OpenAI’s acquisition of the personal finance startup Hiro. This follows another deal that was actually announced while we recorded our last episode of Equity, which we didn’t have the chance to cover: OpenAI had also purchased TBPN — a business talk show, akin to a new media company.

I consider both of these transactions relatively minor compared to the scale of OpenAI. These aren’t expected to dramatically alter their business trajectory, but they are intriguing as they imply an ongoing approach of “Let’s experiment with various ideas.”

Notably, with the TBPN acquisition […] especially relevant now, since it appears OpenAI, based on all the recent reports, is also striving to sharpen its focus on making ChatGPT and its GPT models genuinely competitive for enterprise applications among developers.

Should managing a tech talk show really be on the agenda?

Kirsten: No, this should not be part of the agenda. End of discussion. 

I do want to highlight Hiro because to me, it’s an intriguing case; Julie Bort, our venture editor, exceptionally skilled, covered this and was possibly the first to report on it. She explored it further, and essentially, this appears to be an acqui-hire. The company is shutting down. They essentially stated, “By this date, access will no longer be available.”

This is a personal finance startup that launched merely two years ago. So this decision is undoubtedly about acquiring talent. I’m very interested to see whether OpenAI will simply integrate them into its operations or if they have genuine intentions to develop a personal finance product. To me, it’s not very clear.

Sean: I view both transactions as acqui-hires to some extent. I mean, regarding the TBPN acquisition, it’s said they will maintain their editorial independence on the show they produce daily. All respect to the team that has launched and rapidly expanded it.

Anyone who observes the media should approach this with a healthy level of skepticism; when acquiring something like this and placing the creators under the influence of public policy and marketing personnel higher up in the organization, questions naturally arise about whether claiming “editorial independence” is sufficient. It’s not a magic phrase that just successfully works.

What intrigues me about these two, while they share similarities in their nature of acqui-hiring, they each address two major challenges that OpenAI confronts.

First is Hiro. OpenAI boasts a successful product in ChatGPT. The question of whether that will ever translate into a sustainable business without the need for substantial fundraising remains significant. Moreover, they appear to be struggling to maintain pace on the enterprise front where real profits lie, so bringing in a team like this seems like an attempt to explore, “What more can we achieve?” 

The founder of Hiro seems to have a history of creating consumer applications, so this appears to be a wager on their capability to innovate something that offers more than just a chatbot, potentially yielding greater value.

Then, TBPN is a strategic acquisition aimed at better portraying the company’s operations and enhancing its public image, which has not been particularly positive lately and is facing heightened scrutiny after Ronan Farrow’s recent report in The New Yorker dropped suspiciously around the same time as this and other announcements from OpenAI last week. 

I consider these two significant existential challenges that OpenAI is grappling with currently.

Kirsten: Importantly, Anthropic is looming — not invisibly; they’re making quite an impact — and they’ve been achieving considerable success on the enterprise front.

It feels like they are competitors, yet they also seem very distinct in numerous ways. Anthony, do you regard them as direct rivals to OpenAI? Or are they simply finding their footing in enterprise, indicating that these two firms might co-exist without directly competing with each other — perhaps in talent acquisition, but not necessarily as we once envisioned?

Anthony: I see them as directly competing. There’s certainly a scenario where if AI evolves as the industry anticipates, both could thrive as companies, possibly claiming the top two spots. One’s success does not inherently imply the other will disappear into obscurity. 

Moreover, none of this is confirmed, but there has been substantial reporting suggesting OpenAI, more than any other, is fixated on and perturbed by Anthropic’s ascension. 

Our reporter Lucas [Ropek] authored an excellent piece over the weekend concerning the HumanX conference, where he spoke to attendees who seemed to acknowledge, “Yeah, ChatGPT is okay, too,” but were primarily focused on Claude Code. I believe this is precisely what concerns OpenAI.

Because in theory, there could be a multitude of possibilities for generative AI, yet it appears that the main growth opportunity, the area where the highest revenue is generated, and where they can envisage a path toward a sustainable future, resides within enterprise and development tools.