[Adobe Stock]
“It’s time for OpenAI to return to the open-source, safety-focused force for good it once was,” read part of a statement from the offer obtained by the WSJ. “We will make sure that happens.”
The acquisition, if it went through, would be among the biggest in history. Smaller than Vodafone’s purchase of Mannesmann in 2000 for about $180 Billion and AOL’s purchase of Time Warner that same year, but larger than, for instance, InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser-Busch (AB) in 2008 for $52 billion and Sanofi-Aventis’s Acquisition of Genzyme Corp in 2010 for $24.5 billion.
This unsolicited bid follows Musk’s ongoing legal battle to block OpenAI’s transition into a for-profit company, reflecting a deep rift with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman over the lab’s direction.
On February, several outlets reported on a potential SoftBank-led funding round in OpenAI that would be one of the largest venture capital funding rounds in history. The investment, which would value OpenAI at approximately $300 billion post-money, is contingent upon OpenAI’s restructuring into a for-profit entity and would be disbursed over 12-24 months starting spring 2025. This development comes alongside a joint venture called “Stargate” with SoftBank and Oracle to build advanced AI infrastructure in the U.S.
Read more
Musk’s stated vision emphasizes open-source development and AI safety, a topic that has recently exploded with the release of DeepSeek’s R1 open source reasoning model.
In practical terms, this may mean more transparency (e.g. publishing code or model weights) and a stronger emphasis on long-term AGI safety research rather than solely racing to deploy products. Musk has long warned about AI’s existential risks and even called for a development pause to address safety even as he builds what would be one of the biggest GPU clusters in the world, the Colossus supercomputer in Memphis, Tennessee. The supercomputer is on track to have 200,000 advanced NVIDIA GPUs with a plan to increase it potentially over one million.
Under his leadership, OpenAI could tap into Musk’s financial resources and investor network to bankroll massive compute infrastructure, talent acquisition, and fundamental research programs. For example, Musk’s AI startup xAI (which is backing the bid) would likely merge into OpenAI, pooling compute clusters and expert teams.
A potential change under Musk’s leadership would likely involve reallocating OpenAI’s budget toward long-term and fundamental research, rather than near-term profitability. According to sources close to the consortium, Musk’s group would either replace or supplement Microsoft’s massive investment in OpenAI, freeing the lab from Azure-centric infrastructure deals and potentially favoring Tesla’s Dojo or a new “X” AI cloud platform. Such a pivot could also channel more resources into open-source projects or community initiatives that align with Musk’s belief in shared AI development—even though those ventures might not monetize immediately. At the same time, Musk’s focus on his own strategic interests could lead to scaling back or cutting partnerships and applied initiatives that do not fit his vision. For instance, high-profile government collaborations like the “Stargate” AI project might be re-scoped if Musk doubts their near-term viability. Musk has publicly criticized that initiative and questioned that it has sufficient financial support to make good on its promises.
Beyond funding, the takeover could reshape the culture of AI research at OpenAI. Musk’s “move fast” ethos—evident at SpaceX and Tesla—might intensify the push for results. Conversely, Musk’s emphasis on open-source releases, alignment research, and “safe AGI” could attract talent that wants to work on existential risk mitigation—an area that has sometimes been overshadowed by the race to deploy products. T
In any event, a $97 billion acquisition of a leading AI lab by the world’s wealthiest individual is likely to draw antitrust scrutiny. U.S. authorities, already examining OpenAI’s investor agreements, may question whether merging xAI and OpenAI is anti-competitive—especially if Microsoft’s role is sidelined. Overseas regulators, from Europe to Asia, could also impose their own tests given OpenAI’s global reach.
