According to Galloway, the primary threat to OpenAI’s public debut is a rapidly closing gap in the competitive landscape. He argues that OpenAI’s “sustainable advantage is really, really thin,” particularly when compared to deep-tech giants like SpaceX, which commands 80% to 90% of global launch capabilities. Galloway pointed to the surge in competitors, specifically noting that Google’s Gemini and various open-weight models are gaining significant traction. Furthermore, he observed that rival Anthropic is beating OpenAI in the enterprise sector by successfully branding itself as a safe, human-centric “partner” rather than an existential threat.
Beyond the technology, Galloway and cohost Ed Elson argued that OpenAI is suffering from a massive “vibe shift.” He contended that while associations with OpenAI were a “vibe to the upside” in 2025, sentiment has reversed to a “vibe to the downside.”
Elson noted that Microsoft investors have begun to “call bullshit” on the tech giant’s growth narratives, expressing doubt that the projected revenue from their massive AI capital expenditures—specifically those tied to OpenAI—will actually materialize. Investors are increasingly wary of companies that have gotten “out in front of their skis” regarding valuations without showing clear returns on investment.
The podcast discussion also highlighted the perils retail investors face if the IPO does proceed. Galloway described the current IPO environment as a “rigged game” where institutions and insiders secure discounted access while retail investors are left to buy at inflated prices driven by “pent-up demand.” He predicted that if OpenAI, Anthropic, or SpaceX do go public, the opening prices will be “completely irrational.”
For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.
