It's an administrative burden to sign up very every model provider, and there are many independent inference providers now that serve only open source models.
OpenRouter provides a useful service by allowing easy prepaid model access with much higher rate limits, and they also aggregate different model providers to route queries by price, latency, etc.
I can imagine just the opposite outcome from the same scenario: as people settle into their favorite but commoditized models, competition for marginal inference cost will take over. A company like OpenRouter that promises the cheapest tokens by the minute becomes essential on the low-cost margin.
I think that OpenRouter and equivalents get pushed out of the market only if the froth calms down (as you posit) and winning models stay proprietary, perhaps with their own unique API surfaces.
Okay, I can see that, but if their value is just cost optimization, their ability to mark up the tokens becomes increasingly difficult as well. Or, people will build a router themselves to avoid paying the markup, possibly with reduced features, but someone will open source it. Heck, Claude or GPT can probably one-shot it these days. Either way, I think the whole OpenRouter model is going to struggle unless the market stays frothy.
Also, you don't need to mark up tokens much if you're a commodity volume business. Think of Costco and their margins & membership fees. Not everything has to be high margin, not everything has to be a SaaS subscription.
Just because some Higher Ups in Stripe bought this, doesn't mean its that valuable.
It can easily be, that Stripe can just afford it and think that they are part of the big boys and thats just what companies cost today.
It could be that Stripe really really like the brand name and all the positive notion of it.
It could be that Stripe doesn't want to build this from scratch in a timefrime of 1 year or 2 because Stripe might be too corporate to be able to do startup stuff.
Stripe has quite a high motivation to leverage agents thoguh because they are preparing for Agents which will buy through stripe. They already provide the SKU backend and support the agent payment stuff.
I don't see how stripe adds any value here (and I've had such terrible experience with stripe automatically breaking my stuff I am worried I can't trust openrouter now) but I can see stripe wanting to be in the middle of any two people giving each other money on the internet and this is squarely (lol) that.
The other thing is convenience and centralized security from using one gateway to access everything. It's a lot better than having to deal with N accounts with separate limits and monitoring. And giving your payment details to one company instead of 20 is obviously safer.
Investors like them because the pricing is inherently usage based so there's zero risk of clients using more tokens than what they paid for. Guaranteed profit as long as they can keep a modest amount of customers.
If compute is constrained and expensive, OpenRouter is what you'll use to get around the constraints at individual providers.
[0] https://x.com/dwarkesh_sp/status/2084333160075055122?s=20
Can’t explain the valuation since everything in this space is rationally overvalued, but I don’t think OpenRouters valuation is that surprising, all things considered.
Just guessing. The frenzy around popular, good already, and successful services with the corporate crap flowing from this acquisition announcement too is appalling. The "what's best for you, the user" heavy emphasis when this would be inherently evident in any honest service forecasts the opposite.
Some highlights from one of my agents asked for a no bullshit evaluation:
"By buying OpenRouter, they own the routing layer that decides which model gets called and at what price."
"Stripe wants to be the economic infrastructure for AI — meaning they want to be the toll booth and the traffic cop for the entire AI economy."
"... insider market intelligence that OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google don't fully have. Stripe would now have it."
"The $7B+ price is absurd on any financial metric, but this isn't a financial acquisition — it's a strategic positioning play to own the platform layer of the next computing paradigm."
"140x revenue multiple: At ~$50M revenue, this is not a financial valuation. It's a strategic land grab — buying the chokepoint before someone else does."
I do not feel a particularly strong smell of 'best for the user' here for some reason... More like the usual 'how do we squeeze out more for our PE folks from this' kind of scent.
Using something like OpenRouter (or any of the AI Gateways) is better than tying yourself to one LLM provider that can rug pull on pricing or change models in a way you don't like.
The value is in the network effect I think. OpenRouter is popular and has a good head start over anything Stripe could build internally.
We are basically back to 2020 trying to get people to understand that an NFT is NOT the underlying asset it abstractly represents…
Please go on as I do not get your point.
Tokens don’t have an inherent value and have no other properties that would make they tradeable.
Another way to think about it: a company that spends $1M on tokens is burning that money hoping they will be able to recoup by generating a better product. If it would be tradeable, they could spend $1M to generate tokens, produce absolutely no product, and just resell all those tokens to get their money back. That’s obviously nonsense, that’s not at all what tokens are. And they cannot transform the tokens they got into compute, you need to consume hardware and energy to mint tokens, you cannot convert tokens into hardware
No one is talking about trading tokens.
The idea being that getting your tokens from Provider A is no different than Provider B, especially if they both offer the same model. You can change one value in a request to openrouter and suddenly be hitting a different provider but offering the same tokens, because they offer the same model and the same settings.
You're describing a commodity. However, the commodity isn't the tokens, but the compute capacity, i.e., serving a model. And compute capacity isn't a currency — at least not, until you can acquire compute capacity from one party and exchange it with another party.
dgellow is absolutely right: tokens aren't a currency, nor can you trade them, nor are they fungible. The original claim that "tokens are just a type of currency" [1] makes no sense.