Do you think they can maintain that for another 5 years? Another 20? Is the product AI companies providing worth the valuations?
Are 5 AI companies providing more value than every other tech company in the last 50 years? Thats what the valuations are trying to say. Im still waiting on ChatGPT to cure cancer.
I don’t see it happening; Copilot was a failed proof of concept that crippled the Windows ecosystem and permanently tarnished Microslop’s reputation as the premier operating-system developer; the Linux community doesn’t openly embrace AI much at all, and gamers couldn’t care less about it… All the LLM services have been running at a consistent loss/debt, and CoreWeave is propped up by the only 2 companies that couldn’t even successfully launch a finished product. They need to cut their losses and pack it in; call it a day!
Do you think they can maintain that for another 5 years? Another 20?
I think expecting NVIDIA to fail inside the next five years is a wild reach. You might expect Oracle to take haircut in the next five years, based on their atrocious debt load. But even then, the idea that they’ll miss a credit payment?
Twenty years out, these firms are an even safer bet. Long term demand for compute and hosting services is only going up. And they’re so heavily consolidated. Too Big To Fail in every sense of the word. Are you going to bet against JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs on the eve of the financial crisis, even? Twenty years later, how are they doing?
Are 5 AI companies providing more value than every other tech company in the last 50 years?
It’s not a question of value, it’s a question of earnings growth. Will these top 5 AI companies be seeing stratospheric earnings growth in the next ten years? All signs point to “Yes”. The race to cement these data center footprints is a scramble for limited resources. The Capex budgets won’t be inflated to this degree forever.
Dismissing them for their rapid expansion would be like betting against New York and Chicago real estate markets because you didn’t trust skyscrapers to be profitable in another 20 years. Or betting against U.S. Steel and Standard Oil at the apex of WW2, because the resource demand from the conflict can’t go on forever.
I’m not saying they will fail I’m saying they will not maintain their rate of growth. Very, very different things but i guess you can pretend i said something else and argue against that or whatever idk dude lol
I’d argue that Microsoft really didn’t do anything .com-ish. Amazon would have been a better choice for your argument.
And noone’s arguing that no companies flourished during those years. Just that a fuckton of them drug the market back to hell with their overpriced evaluations. (people laying fiber and buying 1.2M sock puppet ads in the super bowl)
So what did they do that was crazy long bad bet .com?
Windows ME leaps to mind. Internet Explorer giving up enormous market share to Chrome and Netscape. Fumbling Search for twenty years. Take your pick
What does this have to do with Tech bubble vs AI bubble?
The Tech Bubble was largely small cap startups. AI is prevailing B2B and SaaS.
Also “bubble” only means something in hindsight. You keep saying AI is going to crash. Where’s the crash? I’ve been reading this prediction for half a decade
Banks are in the business of underwriting debt and reselling it to private investors.
We’ve been reading this “End is Near” shit since COVID. Put something more on the table.
Owning a debt from the AI industry is a fairly insane amount of risk
Is it? They’ve been outperforming every other debt class for five years running.
Do you think they can maintain that for another 5 years? Another 20? Is the product AI companies providing worth the valuations?
Are 5 AI companies providing more value than every other tech company in the last 50 years? Thats what the valuations are trying to say. Im still waiting on ChatGPT to cure cancer.
I don’t see it happening; Copilot was a failed proof of concept that crippled the Windows ecosystem and permanently tarnished Microslop’s reputation as the premier operating-system developer; the Linux community doesn’t openly embrace AI much at all, and gamers couldn’t care less about it… All the LLM services have been running at a consistent loss/debt, and CoreWeave is propped up by the only 2 companies that couldn’t even successfully launch a finished product. They need to cut their losses and pack it in; call it a day!
I think expecting NVIDIA to fail inside the next five years is a wild reach. You might expect Oracle to take haircut in the next five years, based on their atrocious debt load. But even then, the idea that they’ll miss a credit payment?
Twenty years out, these firms are an even safer bet. Long term demand for compute and hosting services is only going up. And they’re so heavily consolidated. Too Big To Fail in every sense of the word. Are you going to bet against JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs on the eve of the financial crisis, even? Twenty years later, how are they doing?
It’s not a question of value, it’s a question of earnings growth. Will these top 5 AI companies be seeing stratospheric earnings growth in the next ten years? All signs point to “Yes”. The race to cement these data center footprints is a scramble for limited resources. The Capex budgets won’t be inflated to this degree forever.
Dismissing them for their rapid expansion would be like betting against New York and Chicago real estate markets because you didn’t trust skyscrapers to be profitable in another 20 years. Or betting against U.S. Steel and Standard Oil at the apex of WW2, because the resource demand from the conflict can’t go on forever.
I’m not saying they will fail I’m saying they will not maintain their rate of growth. Very, very different things but i guess you can pretend i said something else and argue against that or whatever idk dude lol
They’ll hit a saturation point eventually, sure. But demand for capacity continues to outstrip supply.
So did .com in the early 00’s and houses in the late 00’s
If you bought into Microsoft in '01 and have owned a REIT since '07, you’ve made oodles of money.
I’d argue that Microsoft really didn’t do anything .com-ish. Amazon would have been a better choice for your argument.
And noone’s arguing that no companies flourished during those years. Just that a fuckton of them drug the market back to hell with their overpriced evaluations. (people laying fiber and buying 1.2M sock puppet ads in the super bowl)
They’ve been the pack leader in the tech sector for decades.
The MAG7 have been outperforming the rest of the market since COVID, often by 5+%
This is very different than betting on some small cap IPOs
So what did they do that was crazy long bad bet .com? Them existing in the .com days leaves nothing to the discussion at hand.
Amazon was at least standing up storefronts and cloud at that point.
What does this have to do with Tech bubble vs AI bubble? Are you interested in being on topic or just arguing?
Windows ME leaps to mind. Internet Explorer giving up enormous market share to Chrome and Netscape. Fumbling Search for twenty years. Take your pick
The Tech Bubble was largely small cap startups. AI is prevailing B2B and SaaS.
Also “bubble” only means something in hindsight. You keep saying AI is going to crash. Where’s the crash? I’ve been reading this prediction for half a decade
What about pets.com?
In the end, Chewy.com was the better investment.
Do you have any statistics?