News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:CoreWeave bond yield tops 16% as AI credit stress rises by ElProlactin on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @01:02PM (#50443830)
Yep, the script readers and coverage would be OpEx. Writers, cast and crew working on a specific show would be capitalized into the show's cost and amortized into cost of revenue as it earned money.

If you bought a script, that would be capitalized as an asset, and written off if abandoned. And so on.

The difference is that film and TV have an industry-specific standard (ASC 926). AI companies fall under the general R&D and software rules and those don't allow capitalization when there's significant uncertainty about whether or not the project will work. There's a new software standard (ASU 2025-06) that makes this explicit with a "significant development uncertainty" test. Because you don't know the outcome of a model training run until it's done the training costs are generally expensed as they are incurred.

Obviously there's room to debate whether the rules should be updated and maybe they will be in the future. But they are what they are now. Expensing model training as R&D isn't an accounting choice companies like Anthropic have made on their own. It's what the rules require. So obviously, understanding what the rules are and where different costs show up on the financial statement, it's clear that inference gross margin alone doesn't speak to whether the business is ultimately viable. But the high inference gross margins shouldn't be dismissed as meaningless or the product of some sort of accounting trickery either.

Re:CoreWeave bond yield tops 16% as AI credit stress rises by szvsw on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @01:25PM (#50444175)
Thank you for the detail again. This is really informative. I have family in the biz (as they say) hence why the tv development cycle came to mind. I’m curious if you know any of the history behind the development of that standard (ASC 926) and what sort of competing interests (if any) influenced its evolution… eg studio execs/accounting firms, the unions, regulatory bodies etc. Are these sorts of standards contentious? Obviously the CBAs that DGA/WGA/SAG negotiate are obviously highly contentious and lately that has been at least in part because of the changes to how royalties/residuals etc work in the streaming age, and I assume that some of the friction is likely rooted in how accounting works, even if the standards themselves are not the documents that are actually on the negotiating table.

No problem if this is so far off topic as to no longer be interesting to you… I just don’t often engage with somehow who can comment on Hollywood accounting with actual knowledge of relevant standards!

Re:CoreWeave bond yield tops 16% as AI credit stress rises by ElProlactin on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @10:19PM (#50449393)
Sure thing. I don't know the history of ASC 926 specifically.

There's a formal process for these rules to be made and it's designed to be responsive to the needs/requests of businesses, investors, auditors, etc. While I wouldn't say there's any room for differences of opinion, given the rule-making process, I don't think there are any fist fights taking place over these. :)