ChatGPT for Doctors Nets $12 Billion Valuation - Is It Worth the Hype

• OpenEvidence, dubbed the "ChatGPT for doctors," has raised $700 million in under a year, reaching a $12 billion valuation.
• The AI platform aims to assist physicians in clinical decision-making, utilizing data from scientific journals, not the open internet.
• OpenEvidence claims over 40% of U.S. doctors use its platform, generating over $100 million in annualized revenue through advertising.
• The company prioritizes sustainable growth and profitability over aggressive spending, focusing on building a long-term, independent entity in the healthcare AI space.

Another bloody AI Unicorn Arises

Right, so another AI startup, OpenEvidence, waltzes in, claiming to be the "ChatGPT for doctors". Honestly, they're based in Miami, and their valuation has skyrocketed to $12 billion. Twelve BILLION. Have they even made a decent soufflé yet? Seems they've charmed the pants off investors, reeling in $700 million faster than I can plate a perfectly seared scallop. Daniel Nadler, the bloke behind this, reckons they're helping doctors make "high-stakes clinical decisions." High stakes? More like high risk if they mess it up. Let's hope they're not as clueless as some of the cooks I've seen.

Is This AI Actually Competent or Just Another Donkey

Nadler boasts that over 40% of U.S. physicians are using this AI. Forty percent. That's a bloody army of doctors trusting a piece of software. He claims their AI isn't trained on internet garbage but on top scientific journals. Good. Because if it starts suggesting leeches and trepanation, we're all buggered. They're swimming in a $5 trillion healthcare ocean, and Nadler's diving in headfirst. But I wonder, have they considered the [CONTENT] US Auto Industry Facing Existential Crisis as Chinese EVs Surge Ahead? Or are they too busy counting their imaginary billions?

Moats and Alligators - Building Defensible Business

Competition is nipping at their heels, with OpenAI and Anthropic launching their own healthcare AI tools. But Nadler insists his company has a "moat". A moat. What is this, a medieval castle? He claims it's their focus on physicians, data quality, and being first to market. They've apparently gathered "hundreds of millions of real-world clinical consultations." Well, good for them. But a moat is only as good as the alligator guarding it. And in the AI world, those alligators are hungry and relentless.

Free Lunch or a Pay-Per-View Disaster

Here's a twist: OpenEvidence relies on advertising for revenue. Advertising, you say? So doctors are being bombarded with ads while trying to save lives? It’s like putting ketchup on a perfectly cooked steak. Unforgivable. Nadler claims this allows faster adoption. Fair enough, but I hope they're not sacrificing quality for a quick buck. OpenAI is also toying with ads. The world's gone mad, I tell you.

Burning Cash or Cooking Up Profits

Nadler's taking a dig at companies that are "openly planning to burn billions." He's aiming for a balance between growth and profitability. Sensible. Unlike some chefs I know who spend more on truffle oil than they make in a month. He's resisting the urge to get acquired, wanting to build something lasting. Good on him. It takes balls to turn down a fat check.

IPO Dreams and Market Realities

Talk of an IPO is bubbling, but Nadler's playing it cool. He says the "foundation model companies" need to go public first. SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic – apparently, there's a pecking order. He compares it to the internet boom. Let's hope this AI bubble doesn't burst like a badly made soufflé. This could be revolutionary, but they need to keep their heads down and focus on the bloody basics. Otherwise, it's just another overhyped, undercooked disaster waiting to happen.