OT: Nvidia/AI/Tech Exposure

mstateglfr

All-American
Feb 24, 2008
16,521
6,337
113
I would like to have the money China is investing in the misinformation campaign in the United States to get an edge.
Who are they paying? Or I guess a more accurate question is what are they spending money on?...like advertising campaigns or something?
 

JackReacherDawg

Sophomore
Apr 7, 2026
213
120
43
View attachment 1368901

They only turned $70B due to already investing over $50B of free cash flow into the AI / AWS infrastructure….same reason they took out debt (the amount of which is uncertain). You’re kind of double dinging them for the infrastructure investment. Once that debt is capped off and they go more into maintenance mode with the infrastructure, profit essentially goes from baseline $70B to baseline $120B, before accounting for any YoY growth from the current base business, or profitability from the AI investment. Account for all that, THEN you look at the debt service, and see what you get.
Back of the napkin math - you referenced a $70B profit being cut in half by the debt service, meaning a $35B annual debt cost on the books. Now, apply that same $35B to the $120B number above. Now you’re at $85B. With no growth at all YoY, you’re already looking at about a 20% profit increase just from restoring the FCF previously used for build out. If they keep generating the cash from the current core business over the short term, they’ll keep everything churning along. That simple.
Thats not how any of this works. (Though I think 2026 has double the AI costs as 2025). Its ongoing investment needs. Thats the problem. These data centers are obsolete in 5 years. Its ANOTHER $400b in debt for every, what, 2 or 3 years? The $35B a year isn't paying it off, just servicing it. So in a couple years, theres $70B gone to yearly profit. A couple more, $105B gone. See the problem? AI has to be paying for itself within 5 years. Probably 2 to avoid a major correction in markets.


The reason why they are all investing now is to remove the possibility of “too much competition”. As far as full scale AI driven business, really only AMZN and GOOG are going for broke. Meta is not really operating in the same space as those two, and likely will not require the same firepower. Anthropic will be an interesting litmus test for AI as a whole, but I question if even they can really compete at scale with AWS / Google, without any of the other supporting core business. They will have to get creative in a hurry, if they do in fact go public.
With China in the picture, it seems a poor bet to bet on them not having competition, right?
I don’t see that in the realm of possibility.
Thats part of the problem here.
But, half of $500 billion is $250 billion.
You're just assuming as fact that Google raises their profit by 5x???
If AMZN hits $1T revenue and $250 billion in profit in a few years, with another $250 billion in debt, I seriously doubt any of their investors will be complaining. That’s around $23 EPS. Their most recent report had a trailing 12 month EPS of $8.36. Say it falls somewhere more in the middle of range of outcomes, they’ve still doubled their EPS, even with all the debt.
True. I just dont think any of that is possible. The main problem, besides that their product doesnt work, that their customers hate it, and it doesnt turn a profit....is it doesnt SCALE. the product, by its nature, will be 10x as expensive to provide than the competition, but not be able to charge 10x more. Sure, you can get people to throw $10 a month for movies when they can get them free from the library.....but for this to work you'd have to get them to be spending $1000 a month. Its moronic. We're talking about people that wont even spend an extra dollar for Doritos.

I think "AI" becomes the new New Coke. Every little mistake from businesses that utilize it will be seen as another AI hallucination. And people will hate it.

I think they can all coexist, they don’t all do the same thing. Tesla - they may slip, their stock price has been outrageous compared to their fundamentals forever. But again, they aren’t a big player in this data center mega-build, anyway. There’s room for them in the space.
But can they all maintain these valuations?
Define “survive”….are you seriously saying out of the 5-6 hyperscaler companies, that 3 or 4 are going to be literally gone in a few years due to not being able to make it work?
I think they merge into the "winners".
I’m pretty sure I never went to work and had my Sr MGR tell my entire department at one of the largest companies in the world that we needed to start all becoming more proficient at using a 3D TV remote or a VR headset. As far as the cable / streaming example, they both suck.
I've had plenty of Sr managers push the newest IT tool. They all sucked.
You’re playing the doom and gloom / future obsolescence card on something that hasn’t even really taken off at all yet. While technically not wrong or right, you could make the same bear argument against any stock or entire asset class. It’s not a compelling discussion point. Will Costco still be as profitable 10 years from now, or will added competition from BJ’s and Sam’s Club curb their margins? Who the hell knows. I can make a completely baseless argument that they won’t be, and use the uncertainty of an absurd time horizon to back it up if nothing else.
Ah, a retreat into "we dont really know anything". A classic.
OpenAI and Anthropic need to be bigger than just a chatbot / code generator / algo generator company to make it. There’s no doubt about that.

But, AMZN and GOOG can actually buy the datacenter bandwidth to shut out any cheap alternatives. We’re largely talking about privitization of large swaths of internet bandwidth here. They’ll be able to block out competitors from their servers unilaterally. Its unheard of, but after net neutrality got the ax, it will be completely legal.
Until it isnt.
It doesn’t require as many simultaneous things as you are stating. I don’t think we’re so far off from each other on this one. 1 or 2 megaplayers will emerge, then more niche players that need more specific use cases will also have room. There’s room for all of them in some capacity.
Its just math. Let me make a baseball analogy. I am not contesting that the Phillies may win 140 games next year. I highly doubt it based on history, but its at least plausible. I am contesting that everyone in the NL east will win 140 games next year. Because its impossible, because they play each other.

(And yes, it started this as 120, checked it on chatgpt, and had to change to 140. Lol)

Companies generating this kind of profit causes effects that will have major consequences....that will eliminate those profits. They cant do it without government keeping China out. They cant do it without mass layoffs. They cant do it without absorbing all the profit from general business. Thats not just gonna happen and we all accept it!
 

GloryDawg

Heisman
Mar 3, 2005
20,147
18,255
113

ronpolk

All-American
May 6, 2009
9,371
5,218
113
I’d like to know how many bubbles that SPS has predicted in the last 15 years…. Seems once a month someone else is predicting a bubble.

There is most definitely a boom right now that has to cool…. But I don’t think this market is about to crash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perd Hapley

BTCMoonBoy

Senior
Dec 4, 2024
508
408
63
I’m gonna keep pouring (ok, it’s more of a drip) my money into fossil fuels. I understand that technology for the most part. Flammable stuff burns.
Yep but on the product side - at least for next 3-4 years. People don’t realize what damage has been done to the worlds refiners
 

ronpolk

All-American
May 6, 2009
9,371
5,218
113
Google tells me Alphabets 2025 proft was $130B on $400B in revenue. So if debt service becomes $50B a year, yeah that takes a big bite out of profits. And that debt service keeps going up.....

This is quickly getting beyond me, but I think that means revenues need to be hitting a trillion or so from AI alone in a couple years or so. Or else a major correction will happen.

Plus, how much of AI revenues comes at the expense of those current revenues? I dont think Google can sell ads via AI without it coming at the expense of ad revenue from Google search, etc. They already have ad revenue on steroids, so can they really see gains there? So thats a multiplier to needed revenues.
At FYE25, Alphabet had an EBITDA of $181 billion and total debt (including lease liabilities) of about $59 billion. So essentially, they could retire every bit of their debt in about 4 months. Amazon had an ebitda of about $165 billion and total debt of $152 billion (including long term leases) they could retire obligations completely in slightly less than a year. This does not take either companies liquidity into account, and it’s massive with both companies.

These companies can handle so much more debt service they are in no real danger here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perd Hapley

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
6,313
7,533
113
Thats not how any of this works. (Though I think 2026 has double the AI costs as 2025). Its ongoing investment needs. Thats the problem. These data centers are obsolete in 5 years. Its ANOTHER $400b in debt for every, what, 2 or 3 years? The $35B a year isn't paying it off, just servicing it. So in a couple years, theres $70B gone to yearly profit. A couple more, $105B gone. See the problem? AI has to be paying for itself within 5 years. Probably 2 to avoid a major correction in markets.
IMG_1923.jpeg

You’re reaching a bit on this continuous debt cycle. The data centers aren’t getting totally mothballed after 2-3 years. That’d be a terrible strategy. Some of these things cover 600 acres. See above. They are already incorporating long term, modular strategies into the design framework to allow for refurbishment and restoration without affecting day-to-day operation. Yes, that costs money too, but its a drop in the bucket compared to new construction from scratch.

With China in the picture, it seems a poor bet to bet on them not having competition, right?
China is not building any data centers on U.S. soil. The Chinese equivalents of Amazon and Google will be more competitive when they’ve got their infrastructure up and running, but they’ve been trying to undercut Amazon and Google for years while making very little headway in other business (retail, etc.).

Personally, I don’t see any Chinese company being able to compete at all with AWS, GCP, or Azure on US soil, no matter how many data centers they build over there. The regulatory environment will eat them alive even if they are able to build a semi-competitive platform.

Thats part of the problem here.
It really isn’t. Expecting any of the Mag 7 to “take a 50% hit to profit for decades” is not a reasonable position. It’s not any of their first rodeos in cutting edge tech developments.

You're just assuming as fact that Google raises their profit by 5x???
No. First off, I was referring to AMZN. Secondly, they are already 75% of the way to $1T in revenue annually. They are 2~2.5 years away from that threshold. $1T in revenue could easily yield $250B in profits. They are already at ~$120B when you exclude the huge front end cut they took from their cash flow to start their AI / cloud computing build-out. $250B profit / $250B debt / $500B operating income is not unreasonable at all for them in 2-3 years time. They wouldn’t be raising profits by 5x, more like 2x ~ 2.5x.

True. I just dont think any of that is possible. The main problem, besides that their product doesnt work, that their customers hate it, and it doesnt turn a profit....is it doesnt SCALE. the product, by its nature, will be 10x as expensive to provide than the competition, but not be able to charge 10x more. Sure, you can get people to throw $10 a month for movies when they can get them free from the library.....but for this to work you'd have to get them to be spending $1000 a month. Its moronic. We're talking about people that wont even spend an extra dollar for Doritos.

I think "AI" becomes the new New Coke. Every little mistake from businesses that utilize it will be seen as another AI hallucination. And people will hate it.
I think you might be taking a somewhat narrow view here. “AI” is the buzzword and it brings about a visceral response from many, but these infrastructure investments are about so much more than AI alone. We’re headed to a world already where actual websites are becoming background noise and obsolete. More and more of the internet is running through AI queries that can pull info together so much faster than 100,000 people typing on 100,000 search engines at the same time. AI is the conduit, but what we’re really talking about is the next generation of the “information superhighway”.

People think of AI and they think of what can ChatGPT / Gemini / Alexa do, what can Anthropic do, what can Claude do, what can Tesla vehicles do, etc. It’s way bigger than all that. How good any of those are individually right now doesn’t really matter at all, they’re all going to be 1000x better 2,3,5 years from now. What Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are doing is not trying to have the fastest, smartest car on the road, they are quite literally taking on full ownership of the roads themselves. They are going to eventually divide ownership of the entire internet in the United States, and elsewhere. That’s how big this really is. THAT’S why these mega investments are a no-brainer for them.

Elon Musk is a giant pretentious douche bag, but he had an interesting perspective he shared on at least one thing, and that same principle applies here. A little while ago, he was quoted as saying that Tesla was “a charging company that also makes cars.” All the while, the carrot of Tesla vehicles had been what was dangled to the public as the profit center. But he literally gave away all the patents for everything. He wanted to be copied, and for that to start a serious conversation about EV’s, so he could start selling the “gas” to everyone. Here, the AI is the carrot, but the “gas” is actually the superhighway - the flow of the information itself, in any form that it takes.

But can they all maintain these valuations?

“These valuations?” You tell me. By most educated accounts, the Mag 7 are currently trading at the cheapest valuations that they have in years, when taking account of all their fundamentals. Who do you view as having an outrageously high valuation? AMZN and MSFT specifically have been really subdued vs. their metrics for awhile.

I think they merge into the "winners".
Google merging with Microsoft? Meta folding into Amazon? Wowzers. That’s quite a take.

I've had plenty of Sr managers push the newest IT tool. They all sucked.
I don’t work for an IT company, and we rarely use “IT tools” of any sort.

Ah, a retreat into "we dont really know anything". A classic
I think that’s where you took it first, which was kind of my point.

Until it isnt.
It’s just going to be illegal all the sudden? How / why? You think these data centers being thrown up for hundreds of billions of dollars are being built with no foresight at all into the legal environment?

Its just math. Let me make a baseball analogy. I am not contesting that the Phillies may win 140 games next year. I highly doubt it based on history, but its at least plausible. I am contesting that everyone in the NL east will win 140 games next year. Because its impossible, because they play each other.

(And yes, it started this as 120, checked it on chatgpt, and had to change to 140. Lol)
We’re saying the same thing. I’m not saying everyone shoots to some stupid parabolic earnings level. But take a step back and think - what happens if Google owns 30% of the US internet traffic, Amazon owns 25%, Microsoft owns 25%, Meta owns 10%, Tesla 3%, Apple 2%, and everyone else owns 5%. When I say they own it, they have complete control of ISP’s accessing on one end AND content coming in from the other end. They want to block out China, they can. They want to direct whatever AI driven ad targets toward individual users, they can. Unlimited access to user data? That’s possible, too. VIt’s all on the table. You’re telling me those individual companies wouldn’t all be doing 20%+ YoY profit increases for another long while?

Companies generating this kind of profit causes effects that will have major consequences....that will eliminate those profits.

That’s been said about all of them for 20+ years. Hasn’t slowed them down.

They cant do it without government keeping China out.

They can, actually. They can block China ISP’s and content quite easily. It’s actually the reverse problem, they only CAN’T do it if the US government lets China in, which sounds like a pretty toxic approach for either party to even attempt right about now.

They cant do it without mass layoffs.
We’ll see. Investors rarely care about that, though.

They cant do it without absorbing all the profit from general business.
It’s already happening. The “general business” has changed for everyone. AWS and Azure are already the profit leader segments for Amazon and Microsoft. They’ve both moved wayyyyy past just having Windows / Office 365 and Prime Day. GCP for Google is a little behind both of them, but they are catching up quickly.

Thats not just gonna happen and we all accept it!
“We” don’t all have to accept it for it to happen.
 

The Cooterpoot

Heisman
Sep 29, 2022
7,112
12,410
113
Bring on the robot women! Imagine the sandwich skills of an AI woman, they can wash dishes and clothes timely, mix you a drink accurately, never have a headache, and do full bedroom Olympics, no constant spending and beeactching! Throw a new wig on them and it's some strange every day. That's the AI I want to invest in