Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

PROOF THAT AI IS A PONZI SCHEME (and why it's the reason for Bitcoin's crash): Nvidia just posted the most insane earnings in tech history. $31.9 billion in profit. $57 billion in revenue. 65% profit jump year-over-year. Stock rallied immediately. Then 18 hours later, it dropped 5%. And when...

Ric_RTP's profile picture

Ricardo

35,780 subscribers

212,902 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & PoliticsScience & TechnologyFinance
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Nvidia is pulling off the most sophisticated financial loop in tech history. They invested $40 BILLION in its own customers in just 5 months. Here's why this could blow up the entire AI economy: Nvidia generated $97 billion in free cash flow last year. Instead of sitting on it, Jensen started writing checks to every company in the AI supply chain. Not small checks. We're talking about billions at a time. And almost every single one of those companies turns around and spends that money on Nvidia chips. Follow the money: $30 billion into OpenAI. OpenAI is one of Nvidia's largest GPU customers and spends billions annually on Nvidia hardware through cloud providers. $2 billion into CoreWeave, a company that exists exclusively to rent out data centers full of Nvidia GPUs. $2 billion into Marvell for silicon photonics that connects Nvidia systems. $2 billion into Lumentum for optical tech that powers Nvidia data centers. $2 billion into Coherent for the same thing. $2 billion into Nebius, an AI cloud company deploying Nvidia infrastructure. $3.2 billion into Corning, the glassmaker building three new US factories specifically to make fiber optic cables for Nvidia's next-gen systems. $2.1 billion into IREN, a data center operator that just agreed to deploy 5 gigawatts of Nvidia-designed infrastructure. And the list goes on. Every single recipient either buys Nvidia chips directly, builds infrastructure that runs on Nvidia chips, or manufactures components that go inside Nvidia systems. Matthew Bryson, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, said in a research note that Nvidia's dealmaking fits "squarely into the circular investment theme." Bloomberg even published an entire interactive feature this week titled "AI Circular Deals: How Microsoft, OpenAI and Nvidia Keep Paying Each Other." The piece maps how capital flows between the same handful of companies and gets counted as revenue multiple times along the way. But here's the part that makes this genuinely complicated: Nvidia's $5 billion investment in Intel from September is now worth over $25 billion. That's a 5x return in months. Their private company portfolio went from $3.4 billion to $22.3 billion on the balance sheet in a single year. They booked $8.9 billion in gains from equity investments alone. So when critics say "circular investing," Nvidia can point to Intel and say "we turned $5 billion into $25 billion, this is just smart capital deployment." And they're not wrong. Some of these bets ARE paying off like crazy. The real question is whether Nvidia is a chipmaker that happens to invest, or a venture fund that happens to sell chips. Because right now Jensen is doing both at a scale that has never existed in the semiconductor industry. No chipmaker in history has EVER invested $40 billion in its own ecosystem in five months. Last fiscal year Nvidia invested $17.5 billion in private companies. Their SEC filing literally says those investments include "AI model companies that purchase its products directly or through cloud service providers." They're saying it themselves: We invest in companies that buy our products. On Nvidia's last earnings call, Jensen told investors their investments are focused on "expanding and deepening our ecosystem reach." Translate that from CEO-speak and it means " we're funding the companies that fund us. The bull case says Nvidia is building an unbreakable moat by financing the entire AI supply chain and ensuring it all runs on Nvidia hardware. The bear case says this is the most elaborate circular revenue scheme since the subprime mortgage era and it all breaks apart the moment one domino falls. Both cases use the exact same evidence.
1:01

Nvidia is pulling off the most sophisticated financial loop in tech history. They invested $40 BILLION in its own customers in just 5 months. Here's why this could blow up the entire AI economy: Nvidia generated $97 billion in free cash flow last year. Instead of sitting on it, Jensen started writing checks to every company in the AI supply chain. Not small checks. We're talking about billions at a time. And almost every single one of those companies turns around and spends that money on Nvidia chips. Follow the money: $30 billion into OpenAI. OpenAI is one of Nvidia's largest GPU customers and spends billions annually on Nvidia hardware through cloud providers. $2 billion into CoreWeave, a company that exists exclusively to rent out data centers full of Nvidia GPUs. $2 billion into Marvell for silicon photonics that connects Nvidia systems. $2 billion into Lumentum for optical tech that powers Nvidia data centers. $2 billion into Coherent for the same thing. $2 billion into Nebius, an AI cloud company deploying Nvidia infrastructure. $3.2 billion into Corning, the glassmaker building three new US factories specifically to make fiber optic cables for Nvidia's next-gen systems. $2.1 billion into IREN, a data center operator that just agreed to deploy 5 gigawatts of Nvidia-designed infrastructure. And the list goes on. Every single recipient either buys Nvidia chips directly, builds infrastructure that runs on Nvidia chips, or manufactures components that go inside Nvidia systems. Matthew Bryson, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, said in a research note that Nvidia's dealmaking fits "squarely into the circular investment theme." Bloomberg even published an entire interactive feature this week titled "AI Circular Deals: How Microsoft, OpenAI and Nvidia Keep Paying Each Other." The piece maps how capital flows between the same handful of companies and gets counted as revenue multiple times along the way. But here's the part that makes this genuinely complicated: Nvidia's $5 billion investment in Intel from September is now worth over $25 billion. That's a 5x return in months. Their private company portfolio went from $3.4 billion to $22.3 billion on the balance sheet in a single year. They booked $8.9 billion in gains from equity investments alone. So when critics say "circular investing," Nvidia can point to Intel and say "we turned $5 billion into $25 billion, this is just smart capital deployment." And they're not wrong. Some of these bets ARE paying off like crazy. The real question is whether Nvidia is a chipmaker that happens to invest, or a venture fund that happens to sell chips. Because right now Jensen is doing both at a scale that has never existed in the semiconductor industry. No chipmaker in history has EVER invested $40 billion in its own ecosystem in five months. Last fiscal year Nvidia invested $17.5 billion in private companies. Their SEC filing literally says those investments include "AI model companies that purchase its products directly or through cloud service providers." They're saying it themselves: We invest in companies that buy our products. On Nvidia's last earnings call, Jensen told investors their investments are focused on "expanding and deepening our ecosystem reach." Translate that from CEO-speak and it means " we're funding the companies that fund us. The bull case says Nvidia is building an unbreakable moat by financing the entire AI supply chain and ensuring it all runs on Nvidia hardware. The bear case says this is the most elaborate circular revenue scheme since the subprime mortgage era and it all breaks apart the moment one domino falls. Both cases use the exact same evidence.

Ricardo

159,345 views • 3 months ago

Nvidia just invested $2 billion in CoreWeave yesterday. CoreWeave's entire business is renting out data centers packed with Nvidia GPUs. So Nvidia literally gave money to a company that EXISTS to buy Nvidia chips. Then promised to buy $6.3 billion of CoreWeave's unused capacity BACK. This is the most sophisticated circular financing scheme in tech history. Let me repeat that: Nvidia FUNDS CoreWeave → CoreWeave BUYS Nvidia chips → Nvidia BUYS BACK CoreWeave's unused capacity The money goes in a perfect circle. Nvidia → CoreWeave → Nvidia → CoreWeave → Nvidia Every transaction gets booked as "revenue" on both sides. But the cash just keeps rotating. In Bloomberg's own words: "circular financing deals that have lifted valuations of AI companies and fueled concerns about a bubble." Jensen Huang even went on CNBC after the announcement and accidentally admitted the truth: "We've invested $2 billion into CoreWeave, but the amount of funding that needs to be raised yet to support that five gigawatts is really quite significant. We're investing a small percentage of the amount that ultimately has to go and be provided." Translation: CoreWeave is underwater. The $2 billion is a fraction of what they actually need. CoreWeave has signed over $40 billion in contracts. $22.4 billion with OpenAI. $14.2 billion with Meta. $6.3 billion guaranteed purchase from Nvidia. But they don't have the capacity built yet. They're signing contracts for infrastructure that doesn't exist, funded by debt, backed by Nvidia's promise to buy unused capacity. And this goes deeper... CoreWeave started as a Bitcoin mining company called Atlantic Crypto in 2017. After the 2018 crypto crash, they "pivoted" to AI. Crypto crashes. AI booms. Former miners become "AI infrastructure experts" overnight. Now they're signing $40 billion contracts. Nvidia's play is obvious once you see it: Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are building their OWN AI chips. Trainium. TPU. Maia. So Nvidia's building a "shadow cloud" of smaller providers who are 100% dependent on Nvidia chips. Fund them. Lock them into contracts. Guarantee their purchases. When hyperscalers threaten to leave, Nvidia says "we don't need you, we have CoreWeave." It's vertical integration disguised as investment. But yesterday, something broke. CoreWeave's stock jumped 6% on the news. Bitcoin miners who pivoted to AI infrastructure? Crushed. CleanSpark, IREN, TeraWulf all down 10-15%. Because Nvidia just picked its winner. CoreWeave gets priority GPU access. Everyone else is irrelevant. The smart money already left. SoftBank sold its entire $5.8 billion Nvidia stake in November. CEO said he was "crying" to sell. Michael Burry has $1 billion in puts betting Nvidia crashes. Peter Thiel exited his position. They saw the circular financing and got out. Nvidia funds CoreWeave, CoreWeave buys Nvidia chips, Nvidia buys CoreWeave's capacity... This works as long as: 1. Nvidia keeps funding 2. CoreWeave keeps buying 3. Customers keep renting But the second ONE of those breaks, the whole loop collapses. If CoreWeave can't raise more capital, they can't build capacity. If they can't build capacity, they can't fulfill $40 billion in contracts. If they can't fulfill contracts, Meta and OpenAI walk. If customers walk, Nvidia's $6.3 billion capacity guarantee becomes a LIABILITY. This isn't about whether AI is real. AI IS real. This is about whether the infrastructure buildout is real or just financial engineering. Nvidia manufactures demand by funding customers who buy Nvidia products. Those customers sign contracts they can't fulfill without more funding. Nvidia guarantees to buy back unused capacity. Money circulates. Everyone books revenue. But NOBODY asks where actual demand is. This is either the most innovative infrastructure partnership in history, or the most sophisticated ponzi scheme since 2008. The next six months will tell us which.
1:19

Nvidia just invested $2 billion in CoreWeave yesterday. CoreWeave's entire business is renting out data centers packed with Nvidia GPUs. So Nvidia literally gave money to a company that EXISTS to buy Nvidia chips. Then promised to buy $6.3 billion of CoreWeave's unused capacity BACK. This is the most sophisticated circular financing scheme in tech history. Let me repeat that: Nvidia FUNDS CoreWeave → CoreWeave BUYS Nvidia chips → Nvidia BUYS BACK CoreWeave's unused capacity The money goes in a perfect circle. Nvidia → CoreWeave → Nvidia → CoreWeave → Nvidia Every transaction gets booked as "revenue" on both sides. But the cash just keeps rotating. In Bloomberg's own words: "circular financing deals that have lifted valuations of AI companies and fueled concerns about a bubble." Jensen Huang even went on CNBC after the announcement and accidentally admitted the truth: "We've invested $2 billion into CoreWeave, but the amount of funding that needs to be raised yet to support that five gigawatts is really quite significant. We're investing a small percentage of the amount that ultimately has to go and be provided." Translation: CoreWeave is underwater. The $2 billion is a fraction of what they actually need. CoreWeave has signed over $40 billion in contracts. $22.4 billion with OpenAI. $14.2 billion with Meta. $6.3 billion guaranteed purchase from Nvidia. But they don't have the capacity built yet. They're signing contracts for infrastructure that doesn't exist, funded by debt, backed by Nvidia's promise to buy unused capacity. And this goes deeper... CoreWeave started as a Bitcoin mining company called Atlantic Crypto in 2017. After the 2018 crypto crash, they "pivoted" to AI. Crypto crashes. AI booms. Former miners become "AI infrastructure experts" overnight. Now they're signing $40 billion contracts. Nvidia's play is obvious once you see it: Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are building their OWN AI chips. Trainium. TPU. Maia. So Nvidia's building a "shadow cloud" of smaller providers who are 100% dependent on Nvidia chips. Fund them. Lock them into contracts. Guarantee their purchases. When hyperscalers threaten to leave, Nvidia says "we don't need you, we have CoreWeave." It's vertical integration disguised as investment. But yesterday, something broke. CoreWeave's stock jumped 6% on the news. Bitcoin miners who pivoted to AI infrastructure? Crushed. CleanSpark, IREN, TeraWulf all down 10-15%. Because Nvidia just picked its winner. CoreWeave gets priority GPU access. Everyone else is irrelevant. The smart money already left. SoftBank sold its entire $5.8 billion Nvidia stake in November. CEO said he was "crying" to sell. Michael Burry has $1 billion in puts betting Nvidia crashes. Peter Thiel exited his position. They saw the circular financing and got out. Nvidia funds CoreWeave, CoreWeave buys Nvidia chips, Nvidia buys CoreWeave's capacity... This works as long as: 1. Nvidia keeps funding 2. CoreWeave keeps buying 3. Customers keep renting But the second ONE of those breaks, the whole loop collapses. If CoreWeave can't raise more capital, they can't build capacity. If they can't build capacity, they can't fulfill $40 billion in contracts. If they can't fulfill contracts, Meta and OpenAI walk. If customers walk, Nvidia's $6.3 billion capacity guarantee becomes a LIABILITY. This isn't about whether AI is real. AI IS real. This is about whether the infrastructure buildout is real or just financial engineering. Nvidia manufactures demand by funding customers who buy Nvidia products. Those customers sign contracts they can't fulfill without more funding. Nvidia guarantees to buy back unused capacity. Money circulates. Everyone books revenue. But NOBODY asks where actual demand is. This is either the most innovative infrastructure partnership in history, or the most sophisticated ponzi scheme since 2008. The next six months will tell us which.

Ricardo

71,585 views • 6 months ago

In 45 years on Wall Street, I've never seen anything like this. Sam Altman just convinced 3 of the world's smartest investors to fund his losses. $110 billion. But ZERO profit in sight. The largest private funding round in history. Let me explain why this is borderline criminal & what you have to understand as an investor: Amazon. Nvidia. SoftBank. 3 of the world's most sophisticated investors just handed OpenAI $110 billion at an $840 billion valuation. That's more than double the $40 billion OpenAI raised last year. For context: all US venture capital combined invested $170 billion into American startups in all of 2023. Altman just raised 65% of that. Alone. In one round. And the company STILL isn't profitable. Let's look at the actual numbers: OpenAI burned $8 billion in 2025. They project burning $17 billion in 2026. $35 billion in 2027. $47 billion in 2028. Cumulative losses before any projected path to profitability: over $115 billion. Meanwhile, Amazon's $50 billion comes with strings attached. $35 billion is contingent on OpenAI either achieving AGI or completing its IPO by year end. Read that again. $35 billion is conditioned on ACHIEVING AGI. They're literally writing checks against a scientific breakthrough that may not happen on any predictable timeline. This is what peak cycle financing looks like. The circular logic every investor should understand: Amazon invests $50 billion in OpenAI. OpenAI commits to spending $100 billion on Amazon Web Services. Nvidia invests $30 billion. OpenAI commits to buying 3 gigawatts of Nvidia compute. These aren't arms-length investments. They're vendor financing dressed up as venture capital. Amazon and Nvidia are essentially paying OpenAI to buy their own products. The $840 billion valuation prices in a future that doesn't exist yet. At $13 billion in 2025 revenue, that's 65x revenue. Even in 2021 - the most speculative bubble in recent tech history - Snowflake peaked at 50-80x revenue. And Snowflake was actually profitable. J.P. Morgan calculates that the AI industry needs $650 billion in annual revenue just to generate a 10% return on total infrastructure buildout. The entire industry currently generates a fraction of that. I've seen cycles my entire 45-year career. The 1980s defense build-up. The dot-com bubble. The 2008 mortgage machine. The pattern is always the same: When the biggest players start financing each other's growth through circular investment structures, you're not witnessing a revolution... You're watching the LAST PHASE of a credit cycle. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said OpenAI is going to be "one of the very big winners long term." Maybe. But $840 billion assumes they've already won. Stock prices follow earnings. Always have. Always will. And right now, OpenAI's earnings are deeply, structurally, massively negative. The IPO is coming. The hype will peak. And the question every serious investor needs to answer is simple: At what price does this actually make sense? Sam Altman doesn’t know either - he just keeps raising money faster than he can burn it. This can’t end well.
1:14

In 45 years on Wall Street, I've never seen anything like this. Sam Altman just convinced 3 of the world's smartest investors to fund his losses. $110 billion. But ZERO profit in sight. The largest private funding round in history. Let me explain why this is borderline criminal & what you have to understand as an investor: Amazon. Nvidia. SoftBank. 3 of the world's most sophisticated investors just handed OpenAI $110 billion at an $840 billion valuation. That's more than double the $40 billion OpenAI raised last year. For context: all US venture capital combined invested $170 billion into American startups in all of 2023. Altman just raised 65% of that. Alone. In one round. And the company STILL isn't profitable. Let's look at the actual numbers: OpenAI burned $8 billion in 2025. They project burning $17 billion in 2026. $35 billion in 2027. $47 billion in 2028. Cumulative losses before any projected path to profitability: over $115 billion. Meanwhile, Amazon's $50 billion comes with strings attached. $35 billion is contingent on OpenAI either achieving AGI or completing its IPO by year end. Read that again. $35 billion is conditioned on ACHIEVING AGI. They're literally writing checks against a scientific breakthrough that may not happen on any predictable timeline. This is what peak cycle financing looks like. The circular logic every investor should understand: Amazon invests $50 billion in OpenAI. OpenAI commits to spending $100 billion on Amazon Web Services. Nvidia invests $30 billion. OpenAI commits to buying 3 gigawatts of Nvidia compute. These aren't arms-length investments. They're vendor financing dressed up as venture capital. Amazon and Nvidia are essentially paying OpenAI to buy their own products. The $840 billion valuation prices in a future that doesn't exist yet. At $13 billion in 2025 revenue, that's 65x revenue. Even in 2021 - the most speculative bubble in recent tech history - Snowflake peaked at 50-80x revenue. And Snowflake was actually profitable. J.P. Morgan calculates that the AI industry needs $650 billion in annual revenue just to generate a 10% return on total infrastructure buildout. The entire industry currently generates a fraction of that. I've seen cycles my entire 45-year career. The 1980s defense build-up. The dot-com bubble. The 2008 mortgage machine. The pattern is always the same: When the biggest players start financing each other's growth through circular investment structures, you're not witnessing a revolution... You're watching the LAST PHASE of a credit cycle. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said OpenAI is going to be "one of the very big winners long term." Maybe. But $840 billion assumes they've already won. Stock prices follow earnings. Always have. Always will. And right now, OpenAI's earnings are deeply, structurally, massively negative. The IPO is coming. The hype will peak. And the question every serious investor needs to answer is simple: At what price does this actually make sense? Sam Altman doesn’t know either - he just keeps raising money faster than he can burn it. This can’t end well.

George Noble

1,197,555 views • 5 months ago

Nvidia just made its biggest acquisition ever... A small startup. On Christmas Eve. While everyone was distracted. The startup is Groq. They make AI chips that run faster than Nvidia's. In September, Groq raised $750 million at a $6.9 billion valuation. Investors included BlackRock, Samsung, Cisco, and Donald Trump Jr.'s fund 1789 Capital. Yesterday, Nvidia paid $20 billion for them. That's a 3x markup in 90 days. Trump Jr. just made a fortune overnight. But the money isn't even the craziest part... Nvidia dominates AI chips. They have 90%+ market share. All of big tech depends on them. So why would they pay 3X for a tiny competitor? Let me explain: Groq was building inference chips that threatened Nvidia's monopoly. Faster processing. Lower costs. Better architecture. If Groq succeeded, they'd crack open the market. So Nvidia did what monopolies always do: bought them before they became a threat. They're buying silence - not innovation. And this isn't a one-off. In September, Nvidia spent $900 million on Enfabrica, another AI chip startup. Same playbook. They committed $100 billion to OpenAI with a requirement that OpenAI deploy 10 gigawatts of Nvidia products. Now $20 billion for Groq. Nvidia isn't competing anymore. They're consolidating. They're using their cash pile to swallow every potential rival before they grow. The founder and CEO of Groq, Jonathan Ross, is joining Nvidia. So is the president and the entire leadership team. Groq's cloud business will keep running independently. But the tech, the IP, the competitive advantage? All Nvidia's now. This is the largest acquisition Nvidia has EVER made. Their previous record was $7 billion for Mellanox in 2019. They just tripled that. And nobody's questioning why. Everyone's celebrating "innovation" and "consolidation" and "strategic partnerships." But what actually happened is this: Nvidia looked at the one company that could challenge their monopoly and paid whatever it took to kill them. $20 billion is cheap insurance when you're worth trillions. The only question left is who's next.
0:35

Nvidia just made its biggest acquisition ever... A small startup. On Christmas Eve. While everyone was distracted. The startup is Groq. They make AI chips that run faster than Nvidia's. In September, Groq raised $750 million at a $6.9 billion valuation. Investors included BlackRock, Samsung, Cisco, and Donald Trump Jr.'s fund 1789 Capital. Yesterday, Nvidia paid $20 billion for them. That's a 3x markup in 90 days. Trump Jr. just made a fortune overnight. But the money isn't even the craziest part... Nvidia dominates AI chips. They have 90%+ market share. All of big tech depends on them. So why would they pay 3X for a tiny competitor? Let me explain: Groq was building inference chips that threatened Nvidia's monopoly. Faster processing. Lower costs. Better architecture. If Groq succeeded, they'd crack open the market. So Nvidia did what monopolies always do: bought them before they became a threat. They're buying silence - not innovation. And this isn't a one-off. In September, Nvidia spent $900 million on Enfabrica, another AI chip startup. Same playbook. They committed $100 billion to OpenAI with a requirement that OpenAI deploy 10 gigawatts of Nvidia products. Now $20 billion for Groq. Nvidia isn't competing anymore. They're consolidating. They're using their cash pile to swallow every potential rival before they grow. The founder and CEO of Groq, Jonathan Ross, is joining Nvidia. So is the president and the entire leadership team. Groq's cloud business will keep running independently. But the tech, the IP, the competitive advantage? All Nvidia's now. This is the largest acquisition Nvidia has EVER made. Their previous record was $7 billion for Mellanox in 2019. They just tripled that. And nobody's questioning why. Everyone's celebrating "innovation" and "consolidation" and "strategic partnerships." But what actually happened is this: Nvidia looked at the one company that could challenge their monopoly and paid whatever it took to kill them. $20 billion is cheap insurance when you're worth trillions. The only question left is who's next.

Ricardo

224,264 views • 7 months ago

OpenAI entered 2026 with the most insane revenue targets in corporate history. $30 billion in sales. Up from $13 billion in 2025. While LOSING $14 billion doing it. Let's understand this: OpenAI needed to convert from nonprofit to for-profit by December 31st, 2025 to unlock their $40 billion SoftBank funding. Miss that deadline? The round drops to $20 billion. And they made it. But here's the thing: The nonprofit STILL controls everything. They spent an entire year fighting to become for-profit, got sued by Elon Musk, pissed off California's attorney general, lost key employees over it. Then ended up basically right where they started. Except now the nonprofit has a $130 billion stake and Microsoft got $135 billion for 27% ownership. So OpenAI burned a year of political capital to give away $265 billion in equity while keeping the same power structure that almost destroyed them in 2023. The revenue math is absolutely deranged: To hit $30 billion in 2026, they need to more than double revenue in 12 months. No company in history has done this from a $13 billion base. Not even Nvidia. Not even ByteDance. OpenAI wants to go from $10B to $100B in 3 years. And the losses are worse: $14 billion in losses in 2026. Triple their 2025 burn. They've committed to: - $250 billion to Microsoft Azure - $38 billion to Amazon AWS - $1+ trillion in chip deals with Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom They won't be profitable until 2029. Maybe. But here's the part that makes this whole thing insane... They're not just competing anymore. Anthropic: Fully for-profit. On track for $15 billion revenue in 2026. AI insiders surveyed in December said they'd invest in Anthropic over OpenAI. Meta's pouring billions into Llama. Chinese models eating market share. And OpenAI still has to answer to a nonprofit board that can shut down AGI research whenever they decide it's not "benefiting humanity." The same board that fired Sam Altman in November 2023. The investors know this. That's why the $40B was contingent on conversion. When OpenAI reversed course and kept nonprofit control, they had to give the nonprofit a $130B stake. Basically: "You can keep control, but you better make us whole." What happens if they miss targets? The Azure commitment becomes a liability. The AWS deal gets renegotiated. The nonprofit board starts asking why they're burning billions while people die of preventable diseases. Investors start wondering if that $300B valuation was justified. OpenAI is betting they can: 1. More than double revenue annually for 3 years straight 2. Burn $44 billion doing it 3. Keep a nonprofit board happy 4. Fend off Anthropic, Meta, and Chinese competitors 5. Avoid another Sam Altman situation 6. Actually build AGI 7. Convince everyone it was worth it Nobody in history has pulled this off. We're 1 day into 2026. By December 31st, we'll know if OpenAI is the most ambitious company ever built or the biggest AI bubble in history. What are you betting on?
1:28

OpenAI entered 2026 with the most insane revenue targets in corporate history. $30 billion in sales. Up from $13 billion in 2025. While LOSING $14 billion doing it. Let's understand this: OpenAI needed to convert from nonprofit to for-profit by December 31st, 2025 to unlock their $40 billion SoftBank funding. Miss that deadline? The round drops to $20 billion. And they made it. But here's the thing: The nonprofit STILL controls everything. They spent an entire year fighting to become for-profit, got sued by Elon Musk, pissed off California's attorney general, lost key employees over it. Then ended up basically right where they started. Except now the nonprofit has a $130 billion stake and Microsoft got $135 billion for 27% ownership. So OpenAI burned a year of political capital to give away $265 billion in equity while keeping the same power structure that almost destroyed them in 2023. The revenue math is absolutely deranged: To hit $30 billion in 2026, they need to more than double revenue in 12 months. No company in history has done this from a $13 billion base. Not even Nvidia. Not even ByteDance. OpenAI wants to go from $10B to $100B in 3 years. And the losses are worse: $14 billion in losses in 2026. Triple their 2025 burn. They've committed to: - $250 billion to Microsoft Azure - $38 billion to Amazon AWS - $1+ trillion in chip deals with Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom They won't be profitable until 2029. Maybe. But here's the part that makes this whole thing insane... They're not just competing anymore. Anthropic: Fully for-profit. On track for $15 billion revenue in 2026. AI insiders surveyed in December said they'd invest in Anthropic over OpenAI. Meta's pouring billions into Llama. Chinese models eating market share. And OpenAI still has to answer to a nonprofit board that can shut down AGI research whenever they decide it's not "benefiting humanity." The same board that fired Sam Altman in November 2023. The investors know this. That's why the $40B was contingent on conversion. When OpenAI reversed course and kept nonprofit control, they had to give the nonprofit a $130B stake. Basically: "You can keep control, but you better make us whole." What happens if they miss targets? The Azure commitment becomes a liability. The AWS deal gets renegotiated. The nonprofit board starts asking why they're burning billions while people die of preventable diseases. Investors start wondering if that $300B valuation was justified. OpenAI is betting they can: 1. More than double revenue annually for 3 years straight 2. Burn $44 billion doing it 3. Keep a nonprofit board happy 4. Fend off Anthropic, Meta, and Chinese competitors 5. Avoid another Sam Altman situation 6. Actually build AGI 7. Convince everyone it was worth it Nobody in history has pulled this off. We're 1 day into 2026. By December 31st, we'll know if OpenAI is the most ambitious company ever built or the biggest AI bubble in history. What are you betting on?

Ricardo

97,607 views • 7 months ago

MEET THE NVIDIA KILLER: OpenAI bet $10 BILLION on this company that makes chips 20x faster than Nvidia's. If this plays out as expected, it’s over for Nvidia. Cerebras Systems just locked in 750 megawatts of computing power to OpenAI through 2028. For reference: that's equivalent to the annual power consumption of 600,000 US homes. The deal? Over $10 billion. Here's what nobody understands: Cerebras doesn't make normal chips. Nvidia sells you thousands of tiny chips that you connect together. Cerebras makes ONE chip. A single wafer-scale processor the size of a dinner plate. 900,000 AI cores. 4 trillion transistors. All on one piece of silicon. The result? When OpenAI tested it, Cerebras ran inference 20X FASTER than Nvidia GPUs. That's not incremental improvement. That's a different category of performance. But here's where the story gets wild: Four months ago, Cerebras was a struggling company. Their IPO filing revealed that 87% of their revenue came from ONE customer: G42, a UAE-based AI firm. The US government launched a national security review. G42 had ties to Huawei. Ties to China. The IPO collapsed. Investors panicked. Cerebras withdrew their filing in October 2025. Most startups would've been dead. Instead, Cerebras did the opposite. They raised $1.1 billion at an $8.1 billion valuation. Kicked G42 out of the cap table entirely. Got CFIUS clearance. Then landed the OpenAI deal. Now they're raising ANOTHER $1 billion at a $22 billion valuation. They more than DOUBLED their valuation in 4 months. From near-death to $22 billion. While getting rid of their biggest customer. Why OpenAI chose them: ChatGPT has 900 million weekly users. Sam Altman keeps saying they have a "severe shortage" of compute. They need SPEED, not just power. When you ask ChatGPT a question, there's a loop happening: You send request → model thinks → sends response back Nvidia chips are fast at training models. Cerebras chips are built specifically for inference. For real-time responses. For the exact bottleneck OpenAI is trying to solve. Sachin Katti from OpenAI said it best: "Cerebras adds a dedicated low-latency inference solution to our platform. That means faster responses, more natural interactions, and a stronger foundation to scale real-time AI to many more people." In other words: "We need this to scale ChatGPT." The competitive landscape just shifted: Nvidia announced a $100 billion deal with OpenAI in September. But it's still not finalized. Meanwhile, Cerebras closed their deal before Thanksgiving. And it's ALREADY being deployed. Here's the part that should terrify Nvidia: In December, Nvidia bought Groq for $20 billion. Groq makes fast inference chips. Just like Cerebras. So why would Nvidia spend $20 billion buying a competitor to something they supposedly already dominate? Because they know what's coming. Inference is the new battleground. And Cerebras is winning it. The IPO is coming Q2 2026. After this OpenAI deal, Cerebras now has: ✓ IBM contracts ✓ Department of Energy contracts ✓ OpenAI locked in for 3 years ✓ $22 billion valuation ✓ CFIUS clearance ✓ Zero customer concentration risk They went from 87% revenue dependency on one customer to the most diversified chip company outside Nvidia. In four months. The lesson? Smart money doesn't follow headlines. It follows where the AI leaders are actually spending. OpenAI didn't announce this deal for publicity. They need Cerebras hardware to scale ChatGPT. That's a $10 billion vote of confidence. While everyone's watching Nvidia stock, the real war is happening in inference. And the company with ONE giant chip just beat the company with thousands of tiny ones. What do you think happens when Cerebras IPOs?
1:03

MEET THE NVIDIA KILLER: OpenAI bet $10 BILLION on this company that makes chips 20x faster than Nvidia's. If this plays out as expected, it’s over for Nvidia. Cerebras Systems just locked in 750 megawatts of computing power to OpenAI through 2028. For reference: that's equivalent to the annual power consumption of 600,000 US homes. The deal? Over $10 billion. Here's what nobody understands: Cerebras doesn't make normal chips. Nvidia sells you thousands of tiny chips that you connect together. Cerebras makes ONE chip. A single wafer-scale processor the size of a dinner plate. 900,000 AI cores. 4 trillion transistors. All on one piece of silicon. The result? When OpenAI tested it, Cerebras ran inference 20X FASTER than Nvidia GPUs. That's not incremental improvement. That's a different category of performance. But here's where the story gets wild: Four months ago, Cerebras was a struggling company. Their IPO filing revealed that 87% of their revenue came from ONE customer: G42, a UAE-based AI firm. The US government launched a national security review. G42 had ties to Huawei. Ties to China. The IPO collapsed. Investors panicked. Cerebras withdrew their filing in October 2025. Most startups would've been dead. Instead, Cerebras did the opposite. They raised $1.1 billion at an $8.1 billion valuation. Kicked G42 out of the cap table entirely. Got CFIUS clearance. Then landed the OpenAI deal. Now they're raising ANOTHER $1 billion at a $22 billion valuation. They more than DOUBLED their valuation in 4 months. From near-death to $22 billion. While getting rid of their biggest customer. Why OpenAI chose them: ChatGPT has 900 million weekly users. Sam Altman keeps saying they have a "severe shortage" of compute. They need SPEED, not just power. When you ask ChatGPT a question, there's a loop happening: You send request → model thinks → sends response back Nvidia chips are fast at training models. Cerebras chips are built specifically for inference. For real-time responses. For the exact bottleneck OpenAI is trying to solve. Sachin Katti from OpenAI said it best: "Cerebras adds a dedicated low-latency inference solution to our platform. That means faster responses, more natural interactions, and a stronger foundation to scale real-time AI to many more people." In other words: "We need this to scale ChatGPT." The competitive landscape just shifted: Nvidia announced a $100 billion deal with OpenAI in September. But it's still not finalized. Meanwhile, Cerebras closed their deal before Thanksgiving. And it's ALREADY being deployed. Here's the part that should terrify Nvidia: In December, Nvidia bought Groq for $20 billion. Groq makes fast inference chips. Just like Cerebras. So why would Nvidia spend $20 billion buying a competitor to something they supposedly already dominate? Because they know what's coming. Inference is the new battleground. And Cerebras is winning it. The IPO is coming Q2 2026. After this OpenAI deal, Cerebras now has: ✓ IBM contracts ✓ Department of Energy contracts ✓ OpenAI locked in for 3 years ✓ $22 billion valuation ✓ CFIUS clearance ✓ Zero customer concentration risk They went from 87% revenue dependency on one customer to the most diversified chip company outside Nvidia. In four months. The lesson? Smart money doesn't follow headlines. It follows where the AI leaders are actually spending. OpenAI didn't announce this deal for publicity. They need Cerebras hardware to scale ChatGPT. That's a $10 billion vote of confidence. While everyone's watching Nvidia stock, the real war is happening in inference. And the company with ONE giant chip just beat the company with thousands of tiny ones. What do you think happens when Cerebras IPOs?

Ricardo

28,088 views • 6 months ago

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.
0:22

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.

Crypto Rover

58,862 views • 2 months ago

Larry Ellison borrowed $125 billion to bet everything on a single customer that LOSES $5 billion a year. American banks are already refusing to lend him another dollar. And now that single customer has started to slowly walk away. This is one of the biggest gambles in tech history - and it’s NOT looking good: Oracle has $124.7 billion in debt on its books right now. That's more than the GDP of 100+ countries. Their free cash flow over the last 12 months? Negative $13.18 billion. They are spending more money than they make. And they're doing it on PURPOSE. Every other hyperscaler funds their AI buildout with cash. Google has cash. Amazon has cash. Microsoft has cash. Oracle has IOUs. They raised $58 billion in debt in just two months. $38 billion for Texas and Wisconsin data centers. $20 billion for New Mexico. And they need another $100 billion on top of that. Even US banks are starting to say no. TD Cowen reported that multiple banks have pulled back from Oracle lending. Borrowing costs have roughly DOUBLED since September. They're now paying interest rates typically reserved for companies rated below investment grade. Barclays downgraded their debt to underweight and warned Oracle could run out of cash by November 2026. So what does Larry Ellison do? He FIRES 30,000 people. Oracle is planning layoffs affecting up to 18% of its entire workforce. The goal is to free up $8 to $10 billion in cash flow just to keep the lights on while they build data centers for ONE customer: OpenAI. Oracle's $553 billion backlog sounds incredible until you realize a massive chunk of it flows through a single relationship. If OpenAI sneezes, Oracle catches pneumonia. And OpenAI is already sneezing... Sam Altman DROPPED plans to expand the Stargate site in Abilene, Texas. And the reason is insane: Nvidia's chips are improving so fast that by the time Oracle finishes building the data center, the processors inside it will already be outdated. Oracle is building with Blackwell chips. But Nvidia's new Vera Rubin platform delivers 5x the inference performance at 10x lower cost per token. So Oracle is borrowing billions to build facilities that will house yesterday's technology before they even open. The world of bits moves faster than the world of atoms. And Oracle is trapped in between. But here's where it gets wild: The earnings call revealed something most people missed... Oracle now REQUIRES certain customers to buy their own GPUs upfront and hand them over. They call it the "bring your own chips" model. Translation: Oracle can't afford the hardware anymore. So they're asking customers to fund the construction of Oracle's OWN data centers. The stock is still down 23% this year even after the 12% earnings pop. Moody's rates Oracle just two notches above junk status. Lower than Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft. And they have $248 billion in ADDITIONAL lease obligations that aren't even on the balance sheet yet. Larry Ellison is 81 years old and making the biggest bet in corporate history. He's trying to turn a legacy database company into a hyperscale AI cloud provider using other people's money. All while his only major customer is a startup that burns $5 billion a year and just had its expansion partner refuse to fund the next campus. The earnings beat was real. Revenue up 22%. Cloud infrastructure up 84%. But revenue growth funded by debt isn't growth. It's leverage. And leverage works both ways. If OpenAI stays loyal, if the Stargate buildout continues, if the debt markets keep lending, if Vera Rubin doesn't make their entire infrastructure obsolete overnight, then Larry Ellison pulled off the greatest corporate reinvention in history. But that's a lot of ifs for a company two notches above junk. Oracle is either the most undervalued AI play on the market or the most overleveraged house of cards since 2008. The next six months will tell us which one.
1:44

Larry Ellison borrowed $125 billion to bet everything on a single customer that LOSES $5 billion a year. American banks are already refusing to lend him another dollar. And now that single customer has started to slowly walk away. This is one of the biggest gambles in tech history - and it’s NOT looking good: Oracle has $124.7 billion in debt on its books right now. That's more than the GDP of 100+ countries. Their free cash flow over the last 12 months? Negative $13.18 billion. They are spending more money than they make. And they're doing it on PURPOSE. Every other hyperscaler funds their AI buildout with cash. Google has cash. Amazon has cash. Microsoft has cash. Oracle has IOUs. They raised $58 billion in debt in just two months. $38 billion for Texas and Wisconsin data centers. $20 billion for New Mexico. And they need another $100 billion on top of that. Even US banks are starting to say no. TD Cowen reported that multiple banks have pulled back from Oracle lending. Borrowing costs have roughly DOUBLED since September. They're now paying interest rates typically reserved for companies rated below investment grade. Barclays downgraded their debt to underweight and warned Oracle could run out of cash by November 2026. So what does Larry Ellison do? He FIRES 30,000 people. Oracle is planning layoffs affecting up to 18% of its entire workforce. The goal is to free up $8 to $10 billion in cash flow just to keep the lights on while they build data centers for ONE customer: OpenAI. Oracle's $553 billion backlog sounds incredible until you realize a massive chunk of it flows through a single relationship. If OpenAI sneezes, Oracle catches pneumonia. And OpenAI is already sneezing... Sam Altman DROPPED plans to expand the Stargate site in Abilene, Texas. And the reason is insane: Nvidia's chips are improving so fast that by the time Oracle finishes building the data center, the processors inside it will already be outdated. Oracle is building with Blackwell chips. But Nvidia's new Vera Rubin platform delivers 5x the inference performance at 10x lower cost per token. So Oracle is borrowing billions to build facilities that will house yesterday's technology before they even open. The world of bits moves faster than the world of atoms. And Oracle is trapped in between. But here's where it gets wild: The earnings call revealed something most people missed... Oracle now REQUIRES certain customers to buy their own GPUs upfront and hand them over. They call it the "bring your own chips" model. Translation: Oracle can't afford the hardware anymore. So they're asking customers to fund the construction of Oracle's OWN data centers. The stock is still down 23% this year even after the 12% earnings pop. Moody's rates Oracle just two notches above junk status. Lower than Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft. And they have $248 billion in ADDITIONAL lease obligations that aren't even on the balance sheet yet. Larry Ellison is 81 years old and making the biggest bet in corporate history. He's trying to turn a legacy database company into a hyperscale AI cloud provider using other people's money. All while his only major customer is a startup that burns $5 billion a year and just had its expansion partner refuse to fund the next campus. The earnings beat was real. Revenue up 22%. Cloud infrastructure up 84%. But revenue growth funded by debt isn't growth. It's leverage. And leverage works both ways. If OpenAI stays loyal, if the Stargate buildout continues, if the debt markets keep lending, if Vera Rubin doesn't make their entire infrastructure obsolete overnight, then Larry Ellison pulled off the greatest corporate reinvention in history. But that's a lot of ifs for a company two notches above junk. Oracle is either the most undervalued AI play on the market or the most overleveraged house of cards since 2008. The next six months will tell us which one.

Ricardo

181,176 views • 5 months ago

BREAKING: Michael Burry just compared Nvidia to the company that lost 90% of its value in the dot-com crash and took 25 years to recover. "I stand by my analysis. I am not claiming Nvidia is Enron. It is clearly Cisco." Here's the most recent warning from the investor who called the 2008 crash: Michael Burry built his reputation on one trade. He saw the housing market collapse before anyone else and bet against it. "The Big Short" made him famous. Now he's looking at Nvidia. And he says it looks like Cisco in March 2000. That comparison is not a casual insult. Cisco was the most valuable company in the world at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Its valuation crossed $500 billion. Then the bubble burst. The stock fell roughly 90% from its 2000 peak. Its market cap collapsed to about $60 billion by 2002. And it took roughly 25 years for the stock to climb back to where it started. An entire generation of investors waited a quarter century just to break even. That is the company Burry is comparing Nvidia to. Now here is the number that triggered the warning. In Nvidia's fiscal 2026 results, the company disclosed its purchase obligations. These are the commitments Nvidia makes to its suppliers to lock in future manufacturing capacity. A year ago, that figure sat at $16.1 billion. This year it jumped to $95.2 billion. Total supply obligations now sit at roughly $117 billion. Nvidia is committing $117 billion to build capacity for demand that has not arrived yet. Burry's argument is simple. A company does not lock in $117 billion in supplier commitments unless it is betting the demand keeps climbing. If that demand slows even slightly, Nvidia is holding billions in obligations it cannot unwind. And that is exactly what happened to Cisco. Cisco overcommitted to supplier capacity expecting roughly 50% annual growth. Then tech spending slowed. The inventory piled up. The stock cratered. Burry is not calling Nvidia a fraud. He is not saying it is the next Enron. He is saying it could be the market's Cisco. The single stock that becomes the symbol of an AI spending unwind that drags everything down with it. And the dot-com comparison carries weight because of what happened to the broader market. When that bubble burst, the Nasdaq 100 fell 77%. The S&P 500 dropped 49%. It was not just one stock. It was the whole market. Now here is the other side of the argument. Nvidia's supporters say the Cisco comparison is too simple. Because Cisco was riding hype. Nvidia is riding actual revenue. Nvidia reported fiscal 2026 revenue of $215.9 billion, up 65% year over year. Data center revenue alone hit roughly $193.7 billion, up 68%. Record quarterly data center revenue of $62.3 billion in the fourth quarter, up 75%. These are not promises. These are realized sales, booked and collected. The bulls argue that pricing power and margins this strong do not exist inside a pure bubble. In their view, Burry is warning about a future slowdown that has not shown up in a single quarterly report. So the debate splits into two clean halves. The bears say the $117 billion in commitments makes Nvidia dangerously sensitive to any demand slowdown. The bulls say the revenue is real, the growth is accelerating, and the buildout is justified by the orders already on the books. Both sides are looking at the same company. Both sides are looking at the same numbers. They just disagree on what those numbers mean. And there is a second force pulling at this market that has nothing to do with Nvidia's earnings. A wave of mega-IPOs is reportedly coming. SpaceX. OpenAI. Anthropic. Some estimates suggest the market may need to absorb close to $200 billion in fresh equity supply. That creates a quieter question underneath the Burry debate. Even if AI demand stays strong, capital is finite. When the next wave of private giants goes public, money has to come from somewhere. And the easiest place to pull it from is the stock that already tripled. The real test is not whether Burry is right or wrong today. It is whether demand growth, margins, and contract utilization keep matching the $117 billion that Nvidia and its entire ecosystem are committing right now. If the demand keeps climbing, the commitments look like foresight. If it stalls, they look like Cisco. The man who saw the last crash before anyone else just put a name on the risk. A company that was once worth over $500 billion, then lost 90%, then made its investors wait 25 years to get back to even. The numbers say Nvidia is booking record revenue. The same numbers say Nvidia is committing $117 billion to a future nobody can see. One of those facts ages well. The other one is the entire question.
7:21

BREAKING: Michael Burry just compared Nvidia to the company that lost 90% of its value in the dot-com crash and took 25 years to recover. "I stand by my analysis. I am not claiming Nvidia is Enron. It is clearly Cisco." Here's the most recent warning from the investor who called the 2008 crash: Michael Burry built his reputation on one trade. He saw the housing market collapse before anyone else and bet against it. "The Big Short" made him famous. Now he's looking at Nvidia. And he says it looks like Cisco in March 2000. That comparison is not a casual insult. Cisco was the most valuable company in the world at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Its valuation crossed $500 billion. Then the bubble burst. The stock fell roughly 90% from its 2000 peak. Its market cap collapsed to about $60 billion by 2002. And it took roughly 25 years for the stock to climb back to where it started. An entire generation of investors waited a quarter century just to break even. That is the company Burry is comparing Nvidia to. Now here is the number that triggered the warning. In Nvidia's fiscal 2026 results, the company disclosed its purchase obligations. These are the commitments Nvidia makes to its suppliers to lock in future manufacturing capacity. A year ago, that figure sat at $16.1 billion. This year it jumped to $95.2 billion. Total supply obligations now sit at roughly $117 billion. Nvidia is committing $117 billion to build capacity for demand that has not arrived yet. Burry's argument is simple. A company does not lock in $117 billion in supplier commitments unless it is betting the demand keeps climbing. If that demand slows even slightly, Nvidia is holding billions in obligations it cannot unwind. And that is exactly what happened to Cisco. Cisco overcommitted to supplier capacity expecting roughly 50% annual growth. Then tech spending slowed. The inventory piled up. The stock cratered. Burry is not calling Nvidia a fraud. He is not saying it is the next Enron. He is saying it could be the market's Cisco. The single stock that becomes the symbol of an AI spending unwind that drags everything down with it. And the dot-com comparison carries weight because of what happened to the broader market. When that bubble burst, the Nasdaq 100 fell 77%. The S&P 500 dropped 49%. It was not just one stock. It was the whole market. Now here is the other side of the argument. Nvidia's supporters say the Cisco comparison is too simple. Because Cisco was riding hype. Nvidia is riding actual revenue. Nvidia reported fiscal 2026 revenue of $215.9 billion, up 65% year over year. Data center revenue alone hit roughly $193.7 billion, up 68%. Record quarterly data center revenue of $62.3 billion in the fourth quarter, up 75%. These are not promises. These are realized sales, booked and collected. The bulls argue that pricing power and margins this strong do not exist inside a pure bubble. In their view, Burry is warning about a future slowdown that has not shown up in a single quarterly report. So the debate splits into two clean halves. The bears say the $117 billion in commitments makes Nvidia dangerously sensitive to any demand slowdown. The bulls say the revenue is real, the growth is accelerating, and the buildout is justified by the orders already on the books. Both sides are looking at the same company. Both sides are looking at the same numbers. They just disagree on what those numbers mean. And there is a second force pulling at this market that has nothing to do with Nvidia's earnings. A wave of mega-IPOs is reportedly coming. SpaceX. OpenAI. Anthropic. Some estimates suggest the market may need to absorb close to $200 billion in fresh equity supply. That creates a quieter question underneath the Burry debate. Even if AI demand stays strong, capital is finite. When the next wave of private giants goes public, money has to come from somewhere. And the easiest place to pull it from is the stock that already tripled. The real test is not whether Burry is right or wrong today. It is whether demand growth, margins, and contract utilization keep matching the $117 billion that Nvidia and its entire ecosystem are committing right now. If the demand keeps climbing, the commitments look like foresight. If it stalls, they look like Cisco. The man who saw the last crash before anyone else just put a name on the risk. A company that was once worth over $500 billion, then lost 90%, then made its investors wait 25 years to get back to even. The numbers say Nvidia is booking record revenue. The same numbers say Nvidia is committing $117 billion to a future nobody can see. One of those facts ages well. The other one is the entire question.

Insider Trackers

285,220 views • 2 months ago

🚨 BREAKING: TECH COMPANIES ARE STRAIGHT FALSIFICATING EARNINGS Microsoft just gave OpenAI $13 BILLION OpenAI invested it back to Azure Microsoft booked it as revenue OpenAI booked it as a revenue too Amazon and Google are running similar loops with Anthropic while marking up huge paper gains from AI valuations Nvidia and Oracle don't even hide this scheme anymore OpenAI is spending over $60 BILLION a year on compute while generating only $25 BILLION in revenue. Ray Dalio, one of the most profitable investors in the world, has warned that late stage bubbles are driven by fake flows, not real economics He saw it before in 2000, 2008 Now he warns the same ponzi is happening at bigger scale That is exactly the definition of top of the market Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again That’s literally my job If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret
0:29

🚨 BREAKING: TECH COMPANIES ARE STRAIGHT FALSIFICATING EARNINGS Microsoft just gave OpenAI $13 BILLION OpenAI invested it back to Azure Microsoft booked it as revenue OpenAI booked it as a revenue too Amazon and Google are running similar loops with Anthropic while marking up huge paper gains from AI valuations Nvidia and Oracle don't even hide this scheme anymore OpenAI is spending over $60 BILLION a year on compute while generating only $25 BILLION in revenue. Ray Dalio, one of the most profitable investors in the world, has warned that late stage bubbles are driven by fake flows, not real economics He saw it before in 2000, 2008 Now he warns the same ponzi is happening at bigger scale That is exactly the definition of top of the market Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again That’s literally my job If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret

Hopper

18,271 views • 1 month ago

I can't believe that the once richest man on earth just bet his entire empire on ONE company. And he has 9 days to pull it off. SoftBank is scrambling to deliver $22.5 billion to OpenAI by December 31st. To get there, CEO Masayoshi Son sold his ENTIRE stake in the best-performing AI stock on the planet. Then sold billions more in other holdings. Cut staff. Froze dealmaking. Borrowed against everything he owns. This is the biggest all-in bet in the past few years. And it might be the most reckless financial engineering since 2008. Here's what's actually happening: SoftBank promised OpenAI $40 billion back in April when the company was valued at $300 billion. The deal had conditions. OpenAI had to convert to a for-profit structure by year-end. They did that in October. Now the clock is ticking. $22.5 billion must arrive in 9 days or the deal breaks. Son already delivered $17.5 billion earlier this year. Getting the rest is proving harder than anyone expected. The moves Son made to raise the cash are absolutely wild: He dumped SoftBank's entire $5.8 billion position in Nvidia. Not trimmed. Not reduced. LIQUIDATED. The same Nvidia that's been printing money for AI investors all year. He sold $4.8 billion worth of T-Mobile shares. Slashed staff across the company. And the Vision Fund that used to write checks for everything? Dead. Any deal over $50 million now requires Son's personal approval. Investment managers who used to hunt for the next big thing are now working full-time on the OpenAI transaction. But it still wasn't enough cash... So Son went to the debt markets. He expanded SoftBank's margin loan capacity by $6.5 billion, bringing total undrawn capacity to $11.5 billion. All of it backed by Arm Holdings stock. If Arm's stock drops, those loans get called. SoftBank faces margin calls. The whole thing unravels. And the risk gets crazier. OpenAI's valuation has tripled since April. Started at $300 billion. Now heading toward $900 billion according to sources. Amazon is reportedly joining the next round. On paper, SoftBank's investment looks brilliant. A 3X return in 8 months. But here's the thing: OpenAI is hemorrhaging cash at a rate that makes Uber's losses look responsible. The company generates $13 billion in annual revenue. Impressive... right? But they're literally projected to LOSE $74 billion by 2028. Not break even with losses. Not approach profitability. $74 billion in the red. Their revenue is growing. Their losses are growing faster. Because AI compute costs don't scale down. They scale UP. Every new ChatGPT user costs OpenAI money. Every API call burns cash. Every model training run requires millions in compute. Sam Altman told employees OpenAI is now in "code red" mode. Pausing all other product launches to focus entirely on beating Google's Gemini. That's the language of desperation. And Altman's long-term vision is even more expensive. He wants to build 30 gigawatts of AI compute capacity. Cost: $1.4 TRILLION. For context, that's larger than Mexico's entire GDP. He wants to add 1 gigawat every single week. Each gigawatt costs over $40 billion. The math doesn't work. The business model doesn't work. The capital requirements are impossible. But Son is betting everything anyway. Why would he do this? Because if it works, he owns the future. If OpenAI becomes the infrastructure layer for the next 20 years of computing, that $22.5 billion turns into trillions. SoftBank becomes the kingmaker of AI. Son becomes the most powerful investor in history. But if it fails? SoftBank vaporizes. The Nvidia stake is gone. Can't get it back. The T-Mobile shares are gone. The margin loans against Arm come due. Son has systematically dismantled his portfolio to concentrate everything into one bet. This is the opposite of diversification. This is the opposite of prudent risk management. This is a founder going all-in on a vision that everyone else thinks is insane. And he might be right. Other investors see it too. That's why OpenAI's valuation tripled in 8 months. BlackRock, Fidelity, and JP Morgan are all writing massive checks to private AI companies. Databricks just raised $4 billion at a $134 billion valuation. The entire market is betting that AI infrastructure will define the next decade. But the difference? They're diversifying. Spreading risk. Building portfolios. Son put everything on one company. The deadline is December 31st. In 9 days, we'll know if SoftBank pulled it off. If they deliver the $22.5 billion on time, the bet stays alive. If they miss the deadline, the deal could collapse. The terms could change. Competitors could swoop in. And Son will have sold the farm for nothing. This is either: The greatest venture bet in history. Or the most reckless financial move since Lehman Brothers. There's no middle ground. Masayoshi Son doesn't do middle ground. He bet big on Alibaba in 2000 and turned $20 million into $60 billion. He bet big on WeWork and lost $14 billion. Now he's betting bigger than ever. $22.5 billion. 9 days. Everything on the line. What would you do?
1:06

I can't believe that the once richest man on earth just bet his entire empire on ONE company. And he has 9 days to pull it off. SoftBank is scrambling to deliver $22.5 billion to OpenAI by December 31st. To get there, CEO Masayoshi Son sold his ENTIRE stake in the best-performing AI stock on the planet. Then sold billions more in other holdings. Cut staff. Froze dealmaking. Borrowed against everything he owns. This is the biggest all-in bet in the past few years. And it might be the most reckless financial engineering since 2008. Here's what's actually happening: SoftBank promised OpenAI $40 billion back in April when the company was valued at $300 billion. The deal had conditions. OpenAI had to convert to a for-profit structure by year-end. They did that in October. Now the clock is ticking. $22.5 billion must arrive in 9 days or the deal breaks. Son already delivered $17.5 billion earlier this year. Getting the rest is proving harder than anyone expected. The moves Son made to raise the cash are absolutely wild: He dumped SoftBank's entire $5.8 billion position in Nvidia. Not trimmed. Not reduced. LIQUIDATED. The same Nvidia that's been printing money for AI investors all year. He sold $4.8 billion worth of T-Mobile shares. Slashed staff across the company. And the Vision Fund that used to write checks for everything? Dead. Any deal over $50 million now requires Son's personal approval. Investment managers who used to hunt for the next big thing are now working full-time on the OpenAI transaction. But it still wasn't enough cash... So Son went to the debt markets. He expanded SoftBank's margin loan capacity by $6.5 billion, bringing total undrawn capacity to $11.5 billion. All of it backed by Arm Holdings stock. If Arm's stock drops, those loans get called. SoftBank faces margin calls. The whole thing unravels. And the risk gets crazier. OpenAI's valuation has tripled since April. Started at $300 billion. Now heading toward $900 billion according to sources. Amazon is reportedly joining the next round. On paper, SoftBank's investment looks brilliant. A 3X return in 8 months. But here's the thing: OpenAI is hemorrhaging cash at a rate that makes Uber's losses look responsible. The company generates $13 billion in annual revenue. Impressive... right? But they're literally projected to LOSE $74 billion by 2028. Not break even with losses. Not approach profitability. $74 billion in the red. Their revenue is growing. Their losses are growing faster. Because AI compute costs don't scale down. They scale UP. Every new ChatGPT user costs OpenAI money. Every API call burns cash. Every model training run requires millions in compute. Sam Altman told employees OpenAI is now in "code red" mode. Pausing all other product launches to focus entirely on beating Google's Gemini. That's the language of desperation. And Altman's long-term vision is even more expensive. He wants to build 30 gigawatts of AI compute capacity. Cost: $1.4 TRILLION. For context, that's larger than Mexico's entire GDP. He wants to add 1 gigawat every single week. Each gigawatt costs over $40 billion. The math doesn't work. The business model doesn't work. The capital requirements are impossible. But Son is betting everything anyway. Why would he do this? Because if it works, he owns the future. If OpenAI becomes the infrastructure layer for the next 20 years of computing, that $22.5 billion turns into trillions. SoftBank becomes the kingmaker of AI. Son becomes the most powerful investor in history. But if it fails? SoftBank vaporizes. The Nvidia stake is gone. Can't get it back. The T-Mobile shares are gone. The margin loans against Arm come due. Son has systematically dismantled his portfolio to concentrate everything into one bet. This is the opposite of diversification. This is the opposite of prudent risk management. This is a founder going all-in on a vision that everyone else thinks is insane. And he might be right. Other investors see it too. That's why OpenAI's valuation tripled in 8 months. BlackRock, Fidelity, and JP Morgan are all writing massive checks to private AI companies. Databricks just raised $4 billion at a $134 billion valuation. The entire market is betting that AI infrastructure will define the next decade. But the difference? They're diversifying. Spreading risk. Building portfolios. Son put everything on one company. The deadline is December 31st. In 9 days, we'll know if SoftBank pulled it off. If they deliver the $22.5 billion on time, the bet stays alive. If they miss the deadline, the deal could collapse. The terms could change. Competitors could swoop in. And Son will have sold the farm for nothing. This is either: The greatest venture bet in history. Or the most reckless financial move since Lehman Brothers. There's no middle ground. Masayoshi Son doesn't do middle ground. He bet big on Alibaba in 2000 and turned $20 million into $60 billion. He bet big on WeWork and lost $14 billion. Now he's betting bigger than ever. $22.5 billion. 9 days. Everything on the line. What would you do?

Ricardo

1,880,981 views • 7 months ago

Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is telling you where to invest in 2026. He has personally directed Nvidia's capital into 8 specific companies for a combined total of over $45 BILLION. This is where the most important company in the AI economy is putting its money. Here’s the full list: OpenAI: $30 billion The largest commitment of the 8. Nvidia is funding the buildout of OpenAI's compute infrastructure from the inside. OpenAI is also Nvidia's single largest customer. GLW Corning: $3.2 billion Optical glass and fiber to physically connect AI clusters. You cannot move data between millions of GPUs without it. IREN: $2.1 billion AI cloud provider with one of the deepest power positions in North America. MRVL Marvell: $2 billion Custom networking chips that move data between GPUs at massive scale. LITE Lumentum: $2 billion Lasers and optical components for the fiber backbone of every AI data center. COHR Coherent: $2 billion Fiber optic transceivers that connect GPU clusters inside data centers. CRWV CoreWeave: $2 billion GPU-as-a-service provider. Nvidia's largest cloud customer outside the hyperscalers. NBIS Nebius: $2 billion AI cloud infrastructure company. Quietly building hyperscale GPU capacity for the AI labs. Whatever Nvidia is buying is where the money is going next. At The Assembly, we’re a team of 8 with one goal: help you find the right stocks early. Turn notifications on so you don’t miss our alerts. This is VERY important. If you’re not following us yet, you will regret it later.
0:41

Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is telling you where to invest in 2026. He has personally directed Nvidia's capital into 8 specific companies for a combined total of over $45 BILLION. This is where the most important company in the AI economy is putting its money. Here’s the full list: OpenAI: $30 billion The largest commitment of the 8. Nvidia is funding the buildout of OpenAI's compute infrastructure from the inside. OpenAI is also Nvidia's single largest customer. GLW Corning: $3.2 billion Optical glass and fiber to physically connect AI clusters. You cannot move data between millions of GPUs without it. IREN: $2.1 billion AI cloud provider with one of the deepest power positions in North America. MRVL Marvell: $2 billion Custom networking chips that move data between GPUs at massive scale. LITE Lumentum: $2 billion Lasers and optical components for the fiber backbone of every AI data center. COHR Coherent: $2 billion Fiber optic transceivers that connect GPU clusters inside data centers. CRWV CoreWeave: $2 billion GPU-as-a-service provider. Nvidia's largest cloud customer outside the hyperscalers. NBIS Nebius: $2 billion AI cloud infrastructure company. Quietly building hyperscale GPU capacity for the AI labs. Whatever Nvidia is buying is where the money is going next. At The Assembly, we’re a team of 8 with one goal: help you find the right stocks early. Turn notifications on so you don’t miss our alerts. This is VERY important. If you’re not following us yet, you will regret it later.

The Assembly

7,285,237 views • 2 months ago

🚨 WARNING: NVIDIA x ELON MUSK DEAL IS BUILT ON FAKE NUMBERS!! Michael Burry published an analysis calling the structure “Fugazi”, meaning fake. If the structure is real, we could be heading for a COLLAPSE: He is alleging that BILLIONS of dollars in Nvidia chips are being hidden off balance sheets, and that American retirees are unknowingly funding the whole thing. Nvidia, the world's largest AI chip company sold $5.4 BILLION worth of its most advanced GPUs, the GB200, to a company called Valor. Valor is not a real operating business. It is a special purpose vehicle, a shell company created specifically to hold these chips and nothing else. Nvidia also invested $1.9 BILLION of its own money directly into Valor on top of the sale. Those 100,000+ chips are now physically inside xAI's data center. xAI is Elon Musk's artificial intelligence company, the one that builds Grok. xAI is using every single one of those chips right now to run its AI models. But here is what Burry is flagging. Neither Nvidia nor xAI owns those chips on paper. Valor, the shell company holds legal title. That means $5.4 BILLION in GPU assets do not show up on Nvidia's balance sheet as inventory. They do not show up on xAI's balance sheet as assets. They are legally invisible to both companies. Nvidia gets to book the $5.4 BILLION as a completed sale and record it as revenue. xAI gets full use of the chips without owning them. And the risk disappears into a shell company in the middle. Now here is where American retirees enter the picture. Valor needed $3.5 BILLION in debt to fund this structure. Apollo provided it. Apollo is one of the largest asset managers on earth with $1.03 TRILLION under management and $834 BILLION specifically in private credit. Apollo raised the $3.5 BILLION, packaged it into debt securities, and sold those securities to Athene. Athene is Apollo's own insurance company. It sells fixed and indexed annuities, retirement savings products, to ordinary Americans. When a retiree buys an Athene annuity, they believe their money is sitting in safe, stable investments. That money is now inside a structure funding Elon Musk's AI data center. The numbers inside Athene are most alarming. Athene holds $74.2 BILLION in reserves. It has moved $217 BILLION in assets into a captive insurer based in Bermuda, meaning those assets sit outside normal US insurance regulation and oversight. Of the entire portfolio, 34.7%, equal to $103 BILLION, is classified as Level 3 assets. Level 3 is an accounting classification that means there is no observable market price for these assets. No outside party can independently verify what they are actually worth. The leverage sitting on top of those unpriced assets is 16 times. Burry's says: Every step of this structure is technically legal and publicly disclosed. But the entire thing was deliberately engineered across 8 to 12 steps to move credit risk off balance sheets and away from any market pricing. Nvidia books the revenue. Apollo collects the fees. xAI gets the computing power. And retirees sitting at the bottom of a 16x leveraged Bermuda insurance structure, holding $103 BILLION in assets with no market price carry the risk without knowing it exists. I’ve been in finance for more than 15 years. When I EXIT the markets completely, I’ll say it here publicly, like I always do. Turn notifications on. If you’re not following yet, you’ll understand why that was a mistake later.
0:33

🚨 WARNING: NVIDIA x ELON MUSK DEAL IS BUILT ON FAKE NUMBERS!! Michael Burry published an analysis calling the structure “Fugazi”, meaning fake. If the structure is real, we could be heading for a COLLAPSE: He is alleging that BILLIONS of dollars in Nvidia chips are being hidden off balance sheets, and that American retirees are unknowingly funding the whole thing. Nvidia, the world's largest AI chip company sold $5.4 BILLION worth of its most advanced GPUs, the GB200, to a company called Valor. Valor is not a real operating business. It is a special purpose vehicle, a shell company created specifically to hold these chips and nothing else. Nvidia also invested $1.9 BILLION of its own money directly into Valor on top of the sale. Those 100,000+ chips are now physically inside xAI's data center. xAI is Elon Musk's artificial intelligence company, the one that builds Grok. xAI is using every single one of those chips right now to run its AI models. But here is what Burry is flagging. Neither Nvidia nor xAI owns those chips on paper. Valor, the shell company holds legal title. That means $5.4 BILLION in GPU assets do not show up on Nvidia's balance sheet as inventory. They do not show up on xAI's balance sheet as assets. They are legally invisible to both companies. Nvidia gets to book the $5.4 BILLION as a completed sale and record it as revenue. xAI gets full use of the chips without owning them. And the risk disappears into a shell company in the middle. Now here is where American retirees enter the picture. Valor needed $3.5 BILLION in debt to fund this structure. Apollo provided it. Apollo is one of the largest asset managers on earth with $1.03 TRILLION under management and $834 BILLION specifically in private credit. Apollo raised the $3.5 BILLION, packaged it into debt securities, and sold those securities to Athene. Athene is Apollo's own insurance company. It sells fixed and indexed annuities, retirement savings products, to ordinary Americans. When a retiree buys an Athene annuity, they believe their money is sitting in safe, stable investments. That money is now inside a structure funding Elon Musk's AI data center. The numbers inside Athene are most alarming. Athene holds $74.2 BILLION in reserves. It has moved $217 BILLION in assets into a captive insurer based in Bermuda, meaning those assets sit outside normal US insurance regulation and oversight. Of the entire portfolio, 34.7%, equal to $103 BILLION, is classified as Level 3 assets. Level 3 is an accounting classification that means there is no observable market price for these assets. No outside party can independently verify what they are actually worth. The leverage sitting on top of those unpriced assets is 16 times. Burry's says: Every step of this structure is technically legal and publicly disclosed. But the entire thing was deliberately engineered across 8 to 12 steps to move credit risk off balance sheets and away from any market pricing. Nvidia books the revenue. Apollo collects the fees. xAI gets the computing power. And retirees sitting at the bottom of a 16x leveraged Bermuda insurance structure, holding $103 BILLION in assets with no market price carry the risk without knowing it exists. I’ve been in finance for more than 15 years. When I EXIT the markets completely, I’ll say it here publicly, like I always do. Turn notifications on. If you’re not following yet, you’ll understand why that was a mistake later.

WhaleTwits

48,759 views • 2 months ago

🚨 DOT-COM 2.0 IS ALREADY HERE A $2 trillion AI economy built on the same dollars being passed in a circle I'm not being dramatic. The accounting trick is right there in the filings The scariest part? It's all 100% legal Here's how it works: A tech giant gives an AI startup billions in "investment." The contract forces that startup to spend the exact same money renting servers from… the tech giant. The tech giant then books that server usage as brand new "cloud revenue." Translation: they're paying themselves with their own money and calling it a sale. Look at Microsoft and OpenAI. Microsoft "invested" $13 billion in OpenAI. Most of it never left Microsoft - it was cloud credits that could only be spent on Microsoft servers. OpenAI used those credits to train its models. Microsoft turned around and recorded that exact spend as new cloud revenue That's why OpenAI's annual cloud bill is now $60 BILLION For a company doing only $25 BILLION in actual revenue It's not a customer. It's a recycled funding loop Anthropic runs the exact same script: $2.66 billion paid to AWS in 9 months - basically 100% of everything Anthropic earned. And it gets worse Every time these AI startups raise at a higher valuation, the tech giants mark up their equity and book the paper gain as PROFIT. Q1 2026: ➮ Alphabet reported $62.6B in profit. $28.7B of it (nearly half) was just a paper markup on Anthropic. ➮ Amazon reported $30.3B in profit. $16.8B of it was the same Anthropic paper gain. While Amazon was reporting record profits, its actual free cash flow collapsed 95% to just $1.2 billion Because they had to spend $44.2 BILLION in REAL money building data centers Real cash going out. Paper "profits" coming in Now here's where it gets dangerous: ➮ Microsoft has 49% of its $627 billion future backlog tied to OpenAI alone ➮ Oracle has 54% of its $553 billion pipeline depending on OpenAI alone Trillions of dollars of "demand" resting on one or two unprofitable startups If this all sounds familiar, it should This is 2001 all over again Back then, Global Crossing and Qwest swapped identical fiber-optic capacity with each other just to book fake sales Qwest had to erase $1.4 billion in fake income Global Crossing went bankrupt The only difference between then and now? The dot-com swaps were illegal Today's AI loop is fully legal under current accounting rules That's not a comfort. That's a warning Legal doesn't mean safe. It just means nobody can stop it before it blows up And here's the part most people don't realize: Every 401k, every index fund, every retirement account in America is being forced to buy more of these tech stocks every month. The loop inflates the stock prices The funds chase the prices The chase inflates them further Until the day the music stops and there's no real cash underneath. Don't worry though - my system flags the exact moment the market shifts from caution to DANGER. You'll be warned before it hits, like always. All you need to NOT miss my next call is to keep NOTIFS ON
0:59

🚨 DOT-COM 2.0 IS ALREADY HERE A $2 trillion AI economy built on the same dollars being passed in a circle I'm not being dramatic. The accounting trick is right there in the filings The scariest part? It's all 100% legal Here's how it works: A tech giant gives an AI startup billions in "investment." The contract forces that startup to spend the exact same money renting servers from… the tech giant. The tech giant then books that server usage as brand new "cloud revenue." Translation: they're paying themselves with their own money and calling it a sale. Look at Microsoft and OpenAI. Microsoft "invested" $13 billion in OpenAI. Most of it never left Microsoft - it was cloud credits that could only be spent on Microsoft servers. OpenAI used those credits to train its models. Microsoft turned around and recorded that exact spend as new cloud revenue That's why OpenAI's annual cloud bill is now $60 BILLION For a company doing only $25 BILLION in actual revenue It's not a customer. It's a recycled funding loop Anthropic runs the exact same script: $2.66 billion paid to AWS in 9 months - basically 100% of everything Anthropic earned. And it gets worse Every time these AI startups raise at a higher valuation, the tech giants mark up their equity and book the paper gain as PROFIT. Q1 2026: ➮ Alphabet reported $62.6B in profit. $28.7B of it (nearly half) was just a paper markup on Anthropic. ➮ Amazon reported $30.3B in profit. $16.8B of it was the same Anthropic paper gain. While Amazon was reporting record profits, its actual free cash flow collapsed 95% to just $1.2 billion Because they had to spend $44.2 BILLION in REAL money building data centers Real cash going out. Paper "profits" coming in Now here's where it gets dangerous: ➮ Microsoft has 49% of its $627 billion future backlog tied to OpenAI alone ➮ Oracle has 54% of its $553 billion pipeline depending on OpenAI alone Trillions of dollars of "demand" resting on one or two unprofitable startups If this all sounds familiar, it should This is 2001 all over again Back then, Global Crossing and Qwest swapped identical fiber-optic capacity with each other just to book fake sales Qwest had to erase $1.4 billion in fake income Global Crossing went bankrupt The only difference between then and now? The dot-com swaps were illegal Today's AI loop is fully legal under current accounting rules That's not a comfort. That's a warning Legal doesn't mean safe. It just means nobody can stop it before it blows up And here's the part most people don't realize: Every 401k, every index fund, every retirement account in America is being forced to buy more of these tech stocks every month. The loop inflates the stock prices The funds chase the prices The chase inflates them further Until the day the music stops and there's no real cash underneath. Don't worry though - my system flags the exact moment the market shifts from caution to DANGER. You'll be warned before it hits, like always. All you need to NOT miss my next call is to keep NOTIFS ON

Reflection🪩

3,868,930 views • 2 months ago

Sam Altman just dropped the most insane business flex in tech history. OpenAI doing $13 BILLION in revenue this year. Projecting $100 BILLION by 2027. That's a 7.7X in revenue in 2 years. But they also just committed $1.4 TRILLION to infrastructure over 8 years. When a reporter asked "how the fuck are you paying for that?" Sam literally said: "We're doing WELL MORE revenue than reported. If you don't like it, I'll find someone to buy your shares." Then Satya Nadella (Microsoft CEO) just laughed. This is the most aggressive "fuck around and find out" energy I've ever seen from a CEO. OpenAI is literally spending 107X their current revenue on infrastructure. That's not a typo. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVEN TIMES Most cloud companies spend 15-30% of revenue on infrastructure. OpenAI? 10,700%. This is either: The biggest bet in tech history. OR The setup for the most catastrophic collapse since Theranos. And Sam's basically daring short-sellers to try him. "I would LOVE to see them get burned on that." Meanwhile they're losing $12 BILLION per quarter. Microsoft's latest earnings showed a $4 billion charge that implies OpenAI burned through $12B last quarter alone. But Sam doesn't care. He's doubling down. $300 billion deal with Oracle. $100 billion with Nvidia. Tens of billions more with AMD, Broadcom, and AWS. All while the company isn't even profitable. When the podcast host asked if OpenAI could hit $100 billion by 2028 or 2029... Sam cut him off and said: "How about '27?" This man is either: A) The next Elon Musk building the future. B) About to pull off the biggest financial implosion in tech history. There's literally no middle ground here. Either OpenAI becomes a trillion-dollar company. Or it goes down as the most expensive failure ever. And Sam's basically telling everyone who doubts him to short the stock so he can watch them burn...
2:14

Sam Altman just dropped the most insane business flex in tech history. OpenAI doing $13 BILLION in revenue this year. Projecting $100 BILLION by 2027. That's a 7.7X in revenue in 2 years. But they also just committed $1.4 TRILLION to infrastructure over 8 years. When a reporter asked "how the fuck are you paying for that?" Sam literally said: "We're doing WELL MORE revenue than reported. If you don't like it, I'll find someone to buy your shares." Then Satya Nadella (Microsoft CEO) just laughed. This is the most aggressive "fuck around and find out" energy I've ever seen from a CEO. OpenAI is literally spending 107X their current revenue on infrastructure. That's not a typo. ONE HUNDRED AND SEVEN TIMES Most cloud companies spend 15-30% of revenue on infrastructure. OpenAI? 10,700%. This is either: The biggest bet in tech history. OR The setup for the most catastrophic collapse since Theranos. And Sam's basically daring short-sellers to try him. "I would LOVE to see them get burned on that." Meanwhile they're losing $12 BILLION per quarter. Microsoft's latest earnings showed a $4 billion charge that implies OpenAI burned through $12B last quarter alone. But Sam doesn't care. He's doubling down. $300 billion deal with Oracle. $100 billion with Nvidia. Tens of billions more with AMD, Broadcom, and AWS. All while the company isn't even profitable. When the podcast host asked if OpenAI could hit $100 billion by 2028 or 2029... Sam cut him off and said: "How about '27?" This man is either: A) The next Elon Musk building the future. B) About to pull off the biggest financial implosion in tech history. There's literally no middle ground here. Either OpenAI becomes a trillion-dollar company. Or it goes down as the most expensive failure ever. And Sam's basically telling everyone who doubts him to short the stock so he can watch them burn...

Ricardo

429,960 views • 9 months ago

Google just reported $99 billion in profits it never actually received. Alphabet posted net income of $112.1 billion for a single quarter. Earnings per share came in at $9.11 against a Wall Street estimate of $2.87. That is one of the largest profit quarters any company has ever printed. Yet the stock fell about 7% the same day. When people read past the headline and opened the earnings release, they found the reason sitting in one footnote... $99 billion of that profit came from a line called other income. Alphabet describes it as "primarily the result of net unrealized gains on our equity securities." So Google did not sell anything. It marked up shares it already owned and ran the increase through its income statement. That single line added $77.1 billion to net income after tax. It accounted for $6.26 of the $9.11 in earnings per share. Strip it out and adjusted earnings per share were $2.85. Analysts wanted $2.89. The ACTUAL business missed. Now here is what makes this insane: Most of that $99 billion came from two holdings, SpaceX and Anthropic. SpaceX went public on June 12 at roughly $1.77 trillion, up from about $400 billion a year earlier. Alphabet's stake is worth $94.1 billion, and roughly $80 billion of it sits under sale restrictions. Anthropic went from a $350 billion valuation to $965 billion inside the same quarter. Alphabet's private company holdings were worth about $124.3 billion on June 30, and the vast majority of that is Anthropic. Google cannot sell either position right now. Now trace where that valuation came from: Google started putting money into Anthropic in 2023. A $300 million bet has grown into a $13.3 billion position with commitments of up to $30 billion more. Anthropic committed to buying at least five gigawatts of computing capacity from Google Cloud. Google Cloud revenue then grew 82% to about $24.8 billion, the strongest quarter that business has ever had. That growth is part of the story the market uses to price both companies. And when Anthropic's valuation jumped, Google booked the jump as its OWN profit. Google is the investor, the supplier, and the party deciding what the asset is worth. A tax and accounting consultant named Robert Willens flagged this back in April, pointing out that Alphabet is able to influence the value of one of its own assets. And Alphabet's free cash flow for the quarter was negative $5.9 billion. That is the first negative quarter since Google went public in August 2004. Capital spending hit $44.9 billion. Operating cash flow was $39.1 billion. Capex now eats about 37.5% of every dollar of revenue, the highest share in the company's public life. To fund it, Alphabet has taken on roughly $100 billion of debt this year and raised about $85 billion in a June share sale, its first in more than two decades. This is a company that spent years buying its own stock back. What happens next: Alphabet raised 2026 capital spending guidance to between $195 billion and $205 billion, the second raise in three months. The finance chief told analysts 2027 spending will rise significantly. The company also disclosed $811 billion in contracted future spending commitments as of June, up nearly $500 billion from March. Those commitments are signed contracts that get paid in cash. The profit is an estimate of what a private company might be worth on a given day. Estimates move in both directions. If Anthropic or SpaceX gets repriced downward, the same line that produced the biggest quarter in Google's history runs backwards, and this quarter produced no free cash flow to absorb it. Meta, Microsoft and Amazon are all carrying their own private AI stakes into their own earnings reports. Watch how much of their profit they actually collected in cash...
0:48

Google just reported $99 billion in profits it never actually received. Alphabet posted net income of $112.1 billion for a single quarter. Earnings per share came in at $9.11 against a Wall Street estimate of $2.87. That is one of the largest profit quarters any company has ever printed. Yet the stock fell about 7% the same day. When people read past the headline and opened the earnings release, they found the reason sitting in one footnote... $99 billion of that profit came from a line called other income. Alphabet describes it as "primarily the result of net unrealized gains on our equity securities." So Google did not sell anything. It marked up shares it already owned and ran the increase through its income statement. That single line added $77.1 billion to net income after tax. It accounted for $6.26 of the $9.11 in earnings per share. Strip it out and adjusted earnings per share were $2.85. Analysts wanted $2.89. The ACTUAL business missed. Now here is what makes this insane: Most of that $99 billion came from two holdings, SpaceX and Anthropic. SpaceX went public on June 12 at roughly $1.77 trillion, up from about $400 billion a year earlier. Alphabet's stake is worth $94.1 billion, and roughly $80 billion of it sits under sale restrictions. Anthropic went from a $350 billion valuation to $965 billion inside the same quarter. Alphabet's private company holdings were worth about $124.3 billion on June 30, and the vast majority of that is Anthropic. Google cannot sell either position right now. Now trace where that valuation came from: Google started putting money into Anthropic in 2023. A $300 million bet has grown into a $13.3 billion position with commitments of up to $30 billion more. Anthropic committed to buying at least five gigawatts of computing capacity from Google Cloud. Google Cloud revenue then grew 82% to about $24.8 billion, the strongest quarter that business has ever had. That growth is part of the story the market uses to price both companies. And when Anthropic's valuation jumped, Google booked the jump as its OWN profit. Google is the investor, the supplier, and the party deciding what the asset is worth. A tax and accounting consultant named Robert Willens flagged this back in April, pointing out that Alphabet is able to influence the value of one of its own assets. And Alphabet's free cash flow for the quarter was negative $5.9 billion. That is the first negative quarter since Google went public in August 2004. Capital spending hit $44.9 billion. Operating cash flow was $39.1 billion. Capex now eats about 37.5% of every dollar of revenue, the highest share in the company's public life. To fund it, Alphabet has taken on roughly $100 billion of debt this year and raised about $85 billion in a June share sale, its first in more than two decades. This is a company that spent years buying its own stock back. What happens next: Alphabet raised 2026 capital spending guidance to between $195 billion and $205 billion, the second raise in three months. The finance chief told analysts 2027 spending will rise significantly. The company also disclosed $811 billion in contracted future spending commitments as of June, up nearly $500 billion from March. Those commitments are signed contracts that get paid in cash. The profit is an estimate of what a private company might be worth on a given day. Estimates move in both directions. If Anthropic or SpaceX gets repriced downward, the same line that produced the biggest quarter in Google's history runs backwards, and this quarter produced no free cash flow to absorb it. Meta, Microsoft and Amazon are all carrying their own private AI stakes into their own earnings reports. Watch how much of their profit they actually collected in cash...

Ricardo

363,984 views • 21 days ago

NVIDIA IS BUYING ITS OWN CHIPS AND CALLING IT REVENUE And your retirement account is secretly holding the bag. This scheme is literally straight out of the Enron playbook... In January 2026, a special purpose vehicle called Valor Compute Infrastructure was created with one purpose: Buy Nvidia's chips so Nvidia could book the sale as revenue. Valor raised $5.4 billion and purchased over 100,000 of Nvidia's GB200 GPUs. But $1.9 billion of that money came FROM Nvidia itself. Nvidia invested $1.9 billion into the shell company, then sold that same shell company $5.4 billion worth of its own chips and booked every dollar as revenue. It's the Girl Scout whose dad bought all the cookies and then she wins the sales contest because Dad was the customer. Except this Girl Scout is a trillion-dollar company and the cookie sale is $5.4 billion. But it gets MUCH worse: The remaining $3.5 billion in financing came from Apollo Global Management. Apollo structured the debt, packaged it into securities, and then sold those securities to Athene. And guess who Athene is? Apollo's OWN insurance subsidiary. The one that sells fixed annuities to American retirees as safe, conservative retirement products. Follow the chain: Nvidia funds a shell company with $1.9 billion. The shell company buys $5.4 billion in Nvidia chips. Apollo finances the remaining $3.5 billion. Apollo sells the debt to its own insurance arm. That insurance arm packages it into annuity products and sells them to retirees who think they're buying something safe. The retirees have no idea that their retirement savings are now backed by 100,000 computer chips sitting in some data center that will be worth pennies on the dollar in three years. Now look at what's happening inside Athene: $74.2 billion in US reserves but $217 billion in assets have been shifted to a Bermuda-based captive insurer, outside normal US regulatory oversight. $103 billion of that portfolio (roughly 35%) is classified as Level 3 assets. That means there is no observable market price. These assets are valued by internal models, not by actual markets. And sitting on top of all those unpriced assets? 16.6x leverage. If you're getting flashbacks to 2008, you should be. Back then it was mortgages bundled into securities that nobody understood, sold to investors who had no idea what they were holding, rated as safe by agencies that never looked under the hood. Today it's GPU-backed securities. Computer chips bundled into structured credit instruments, routed through an offshore insurance subsidiary, and sold to you as a retirement product. The collateral is 100,000 GPUs leased to a single customer through an xAI subsidiary. If xAI stops making lease payments for any reason - financial distress, a pivot in strategy, anything - the entire structure unravels. And Nvidia releases new architectures every year, so each generation delivers dramatically more compute per watt. A 5 year lease on technology that's obsolete in 2 years creates a mismatch that should terrify every annuity holder in America. Every single step in this chain is technically legal. The SPV is legal, the lease is legal, Nvidia's equity stake is legal, the securitization is legal, and the Bermuda transfer is legal. But legality and legitimacy are not the same thing. I've seen every trick Wall Street has ever pulled in my 45 years of doing this. And what I'm looking at right now is a pipeline that takes AI infrastructure risk, launders it through 8 layers of financial engineering, and deposits it in the retirement accounts of Americans who never agreed to fund Elon Musk's data centers. In 2008 it was mortgage-backed securities. In 2026 it's GPU-backed securities. Different asset. Same greed. With the same ending.
2:39

NVIDIA IS BUYING ITS OWN CHIPS AND CALLING IT REVENUE And your retirement account is secretly holding the bag. This scheme is literally straight out of the Enron playbook... In January 2026, a special purpose vehicle called Valor Compute Infrastructure was created with one purpose: Buy Nvidia's chips so Nvidia could book the sale as revenue. Valor raised $5.4 billion and purchased over 100,000 of Nvidia's GB200 GPUs. But $1.9 billion of that money came FROM Nvidia itself. Nvidia invested $1.9 billion into the shell company, then sold that same shell company $5.4 billion worth of its own chips and booked every dollar as revenue. It's the Girl Scout whose dad bought all the cookies and then she wins the sales contest because Dad was the customer. Except this Girl Scout is a trillion-dollar company and the cookie sale is $5.4 billion. But it gets MUCH worse: The remaining $3.5 billion in financing came from Apollo Global Management. Apollo structured the debt, packaged it into securities, and then sold those securities to Athene. And guess who Athene is? Apollo's OWN insurance subsidiary. The one that sells fixed annuities to American retirees as safe, conservative retirement products. Follow the chain: Nvidia funds a shell company with $1.9 billion. The shell company buys $5.4 billion in Nvidia chips. Apollo finances the remaining $3.5 billion. Apollo sells the debt to its own insurance arm. That insurance arm packages it into annuity products and sells them to retirees who think they're buying something safe. The retirees have no idea that their retirement savings are now backed by 100,000 computer chips sitting in some data center that will be worth pennies on the dollar in three years. Now look at what's happening inside Athene: $74.2 billion in US reserves but $217 billion in assets have been shifted to a Bermuda-based captive insurer, outside normal US regulatory oversight. $103 billion of that portfolio (roughly 35%) is classified as Level 3 assets. That means there is no observable market price. These assets are valued by internal models, not by actual markets. And sitting on top of all those unpriced assets? 16.6x leverage. If you're getting flashbacks to 2008, you should be. Back then it was mortgages bundled into securities that nobody understood, sold to investors who had no idea what they were holding, rated as safe by agencies that never looked under the hood. Today it's GPU-backed securities. Computer chips bundled into structured credit instruments, routed through an offshore insurance subsidiary, and sold to you as a retirement product. The collateral is 100,000 GPUs leased to a single customer through an xAI subsidiary. If xAI stops making lease payments for any reason - financial distress, a pivot in strategy, anything - the entire structure unravels. And Nvidia releases new architectures every year, so each generation delivers dramatically more compute per watt. A 5 year lease on technology that's obsolete in 2 years creates a mismatch that should terrify every annuity holder in America. Every single step in this chain is technically legal. The SPV is legal, the lease is legal, Nvidia's equity stake is legal, the securitization is legal, and the Bermuda transfer is legal. But legality and legitimacy are not the same thing. I've seen every trick Wall Street has ever pulled in my 45 years of doing this. And what I'm looking at right now is a pipeline that takes AI infrastructure risk, launders it through 8 layers of financial engineering, and deposits it in the retirement accounts of Americans who never agreed to fund Elon Musk's data centers. In 2008 it was mortgage-backed securities. In 2026 it's GPU-backed securities. Different asset. Same greed. With the same ending.

George Noble

598,481 views • 2 months ago

Big Tech is spending $700 BILLION on AI this year. But their cash flow is collapsing. Amazon is going into debt. Google's free cash flow is dropping 90%. And they're literally paying influencers $600,000 each to convince you AI is worth using. If this technology was as revolutionary as they claim, why are they spending half a million dollars per creator to sell it? Here's what's actually happening behind the scenes: This week, all four tech giants reported earnings at once and every single one dropped a spending number that made Wall Street lose its mind. Amazon: $200 billion in capex. The largest corporate capital expenditure in HISTORY. Stock dropped 9%. Google: $185 billion. Wall Street expected $120 billion. Stock dropped 5%. Meta: $135 billion. Double what they spent last year. Microsoft: down 17% this year, worst performer in the group. Combined 2026 AI infrastructure spend: almost $700 billion. But here's where it gets ugly. Amazon's free cash flow collapsed 71%. Morgan Stanley projects they'll burn through $17 billion in NEGATIVE free cash flow this year. Bank of America says the deficit could hit $28 billion. Amazon quietly filed with the SEC on Friday saying they might need to raise debt to keep building. Google's free cash flow is projected to crater 90%, from $73 billion down to $8.2 billion. They already did a $25 billion bond sale in November and their long-term debt QUADRUPLED last year. These companies are spending everything they have, then borrowing more, then spending that too. Now here's the part that got me thinking: CNBC just reported that Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are paying influencers between $400,000 and $600,000 EACH to promote AI products on Instagram and YouTube. AI platforms spent over $1 BILLION on digital ads in 2025, a 126% jump year-over-year. Google and Microsoft's AI ad spending jumped 495% in January 2026 alone. Anthropic is running Super Bowl ads. OpenAI is flying creators to private events and covering all expenses. When was the last time a truly revolutionary technology needed a $1 billion ad campaign and $600K influencer deals to get adoption? Did the iPhone need influencer campaigns? Did Google Search need Super Bowl ads in 1998? Did email need a billion dollar marketing push? No. People just used them because the value was obvious. You know what DOES need massive paid promotions? Pharmaceutical drugs. Crypto exchanges. Online gambling apps. MLM companies. Products where adoption is driven by hype, not utility. And now, apparently, AI. So the pitch from Big Tech is: "This technology will eliminate your job. Also please use it. Here's $600K if you tell your followers it's cool." They need HUMANS to sell a product they designed to REPLACE humans. They need creators to promote a technology that will eventually make creators obsolete. They need influencers to build trust in a system that will eliminate the need for influencer marketing entirely. The question everyone should be asking: If $700 billion per year in spending can't produce a product that sells itself, when exactly does this start making money? Because right now the math is messed up. $700 billion in spending, cash flow crashing, stocks tanking, SEC filings about raising more capital, and the best growth strategy they've got is paying tiktokers to demo features. Either AI is about to deliver the greatest economic transformation in human history, or we're watching the most expensive corporate Hail Mary ever thrown. And the fact that they need to pay half a million dollars per influencer to convince you it's the first one isn't a good sign.
0:49

Big Tech is spending $700 BILLION on AI this year. But their cash flow is collapsing. Amazon is going into debt. Google's free cash flow is dropping 90%. And they're literally paying influencers $600,000 each to convince you AI is worth using. If this technology was as revolutionary as they claim, why are they spending half a million dollars per creator to sell it? Here's what's actually happening behind the scenes: This week, all four tech giants reported earnings at once and every single one dropped a spending number that made Wall Street lose its mind. Amazon: $200 billion in capex. The largest corporate capital expenditure in HISTORY. Stock dropped 9%. Google: $185 billion. Wall Street expected $120 billion. Stock dropped 5%. Meta: $135 billion. Double what they spent last year. Microsoft: down 17% this year, worst performer in the group. Combined 2026 AI infrastructure spend: almost $700 billion. But here's where it gets ugly. Amazon's free cash flow collapsed 71%. Morgan Stanley projects they'll burn through $17 billion in NEGATIVE free cash flow this year. Bank of America says the deficit could hit $28 billion. Amazon quietly filed with the SEC on Friday saying they might need to raise debt to keep building. Google's free cash flow is projected to crater 90%, from $73 billion down to $8.2 billion. They already did a $25 billion bond sale in November and their long-term debt QUADRUPLED last year. These companies are spending everything they have, then borrowing more, then spending that too. Now here's the part that got me thinking: CNBC just reported that Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are paying influencers between $400,000 and $600,000 EACH to promote AI products on Instagram and YouTube. AI platforms spent over $1 BILLION on digital ads in 2025, a 126% jump year-over-year. Google and Microsoft's AI ad spending jumped 495% in January 2026 alone. Anthropic is running Super Bowl ads. OpenAI is flying creators to private events and covering all expenses. When was the last time a truly revolutionary technology needed a $1 billion ad campaign and $600K influencer deals to get adoption? Did the iPhone need influencer campaigns? Did Google Search need Super Bowl ads in 1998? Did email need a billion dollar marketing push? No. People just used them because the value was obvious. You know what DOES need massive paid promotions? Pharmaceutical drugs. Crypto exchanges. Online gambling apps. MLM companies. Products where adoption is driven by hype, not utility. And now, apparently, AI. So the pitch from Big Tech is: "This technology will eliminate your job. Also please use it. Here's $600K if you tell your followers it's cool." They need HUMANS to sell a product they designed to REPLACE humans. They need creators to promote a technology that will eventually make creators obsolete. They need influencers to build trust in a system that will eliminate the need for influencer marketing entirely. The question everyone should be asking: If $700 billion per year in spending can't produce a product that sells itself, when exactly does this start making money? Because right now the math is messed up. $700 billion in spending, cash flow crashing, stocks tanking, SEC filings about raising more capital, and the best growth strategy they've got is paying tiktokers to demo features. Either AI is about to deliver the greatest economic transformation in human history, or we're watching the most expensive corporate Hail Mary ever thrown. And the fact that they need to pay half a million dollars per influencer to convince you it's the first one isn't a good sign.

Ricardo

725,581 views • 6 months ago

The AI supply chain has the craziest value cascade of any industry in the world. thinks that over the next five years, the biggest bottleneck to deploying AI will be EUV machines. ASML sells EUV machines for $300-400 million. You need about three and a half machines, so $1.2 billion, to produce a gigawatt of compute each year. So $1.2 billion of ASL and ML machines are producing $35 billion worth of NVIDIA chips a year (and of course those machines can be used over many years). Then those Nvidia chips can generate $100s of billion of token revenue for AI labs. Or think about: over the last three years, TSMC spent $100 billion on CapEx. A small fraction of that went to building the fab capacity used for Nvidia's chips. Nvidia turned that fraction into $216 billion of revenue last fiscal year alone. Relative to the value of the thing they’re producing, TSMC’s CapEx looks crazy small. So why aren’t ASML/TSMC/etc juicing up margins to capture more of the value they’re generating? And why aren’t they scaling up CapEx so that they can take advantage of the crazy AI growth worlds? Dylan Patel says that it’s because these upstream players aren’t AGI-pilled enough. They’re still looking for stable, gentle long-term growth. The insane demand signal is taking a long time to percolate up the supply chain.
2:02

The AI supply chain has the craziest value cascade of any industry in the world. thinks that over the next five years, the biggest bottleneck to deploying AI will be EUV machines. ASML sells EUV machines for $300-400 million. You need about three and a half machines, so $1.2 billion, to produce a gigawatt of compute each year. So $1.2 billion of ASL and ML machines are producing $35 billion worth of NVIDIA chips a year (and of course those machines can be used over many years). Then those Nvidia chips can generate $100s of billion of token revenue for AI labs. Or think about: over the last three years, TSMC spent $100 billion on CapEx. A small fraction of that went to building the fab capacity used for Nvidia's chips. Nvidia turned that fraction into $216 billion of revenue last fiscal year alone. Relative to the value of the thing they’re producing, TSMC’s CapEx looks crazy small. So why aren’t ASML/TSMC/etc juicing up margins to capture more of the value they’re generating? And why aren’t they scaling up CapEx so that they can take advantage of the crazy AI growth worlds? Dylan Patel says that it’s because these upstream players aren’t AGI-pilled enough. They’re still looking for stable, gentle long-term growth. The insane demand signal is taking a long time to percolate up the supply chain.

Dwarkesh Patel

78,103 views • 5 months ago

OpenAI's OWN CFO just admitted they cannot pay their bills. Let me walk you through what just leaked, because the implications are bigger than you'd expect: Sarah Friar, the Chief Financial Officer of OpenAI, has been warning OpenAI's leadership that the company may NOT be able to pay for the computing contracts it has already signed if revenue does not start growing a lot faster than it currently is. Read that sentence again, because it is the single most important thing you'll read about AI infrastructure this year. The person whose actual JOB is signing the checks is telling the people around her that the checks may not clear. Sam Altman and Friar issued a joint statement calling the report "ridiculous" and insisting they're aligned on buying as much compute as possible. Of course they did. Sarah Friar is steering this company into an IPO with a reported $852 billion valuation. The last thing they need 6 months before printing the S-1 is the CFO publicly questioning whether the entire infrastructure thesis is solvent. But the denial doesn't change what WAS reported. And the reported facts are devastating: OpenAI missed its internal target of 1 billion weekly active ChatGPT users by the end of 2025. ChatGPT's share of generative AI web traffic collapsed from 86.7% a year ago to 64.5% in January. In the same window, Google's Gemini rose from 5.7% to 21.5%. They missed MULTIPLE monthly revenue targets earlier this year. They are losing ground to Anthropic in coding and to enterprise customers more broadly. Subscribers are leaving. Now hold that picture in your head and look at what they have committed to spend: Roughly $1.4 TRILLION in data center, GPU, and memory contracts. $300 billion to Oracle. $250 billion to Microsoft. $38 billion to Amazon. $90 billion to AMD. Tens of billions more to Broadcom, CoreWeave, and Nvidia. And Deutsche Bank estimates $143 billion in cumulative negative free cash flow between now and 2029. The CFO is not "worried" because she is conservative by nature. She is worried because she is doing the math. Here's the part the market hasn't yet processed: OpenAI is the marginal buyer for the ENTIRE AI infrastructure complex. - Oracle's $553 billion backlog is more than half OpenAI. - Nvidia's 2027 revenue assumptions lean heavily on OpenAI deployments. - AMD's "$90 billion in cumulative hardware revenue" claim from its OpenAI deal IS the OpenAI deal. - CoreWeave is essentially a leveraged bet on OpenAI's ability to pay. - Broadcom's custom silicon roadmap was built around OpenAI demand. If OpenAI cannot fund the contracts it has signed, every one of those numbers gets re-cut. Every Mag 7 capex slide gets re-cut. Every analyst model that uses "AI infrastructure demand" as a justification for trading the S&P 500 at 26x forward earnings gets re-cut. This is exactly what I've been calling the counterparty risk problem. You can't have a $1.4 trillion supply chain whose ultimate customer expects to LOSE $143 billion before it generates a dollar of free cash flow, and then pretend the suppliers carry no risk. Pre-market this morning told you the market is starting to figure it out: Rambus down. Marvell down. Oracle indicated down 4.5%. Nvidia, AMD, Broadcom under pressure. The chip complex understands that "OpenAI's CFO is worried" is not noise. It is the first crack in the financing structure that the entire AI trade rests on. This is just like the junk bonds in 1989, Telecom in 2000, or Subprime CDOs in 2007. The pattern is always the same: Outside skeptics raise the alarm and get ignored. Then someone inside the building tells the truth and the building empties. Sarah Friar just told the truth. The Mag 7 are literally priced for OpenAI delivering what its OWN CFO says it may not be able to pay for. Below is a video from February of last year - everything is aging TERRIBLY...
1:08

OpenAI's OWN CFO just admitted they cannot pay their bills. Let me walk you through what just leaked, because the implications are bigger than you'd expect: Sarah Friar, the Chief Financial Officer of OpenAI, has been warning OpenAI's leadership that the company may NOT be able to pay for the computing contracts it has already signed if revenue does not start growing a lot faster than it currently is. Read that sentence again, because it is the single most important thing you'll read about AI infrastructure this year. The person whose actual JOB is signing the checks is telling the people around her that the checks may not clear. Sam Altman and Friar issued a joint statement calling the report "ridiculous" and insisting they're aligned on buying as much compute as possible. Of course they did. Sarah Friar is steering this company into an IPO with a reported $852 billion valuation. The last thing they need 6 months before printing the S-1 is the CFO publicly questioning whether the entire infrastructure thesis is solvent. But the denial doesn't change what WAS reported. And the reported facts are devastating: OpenAI missed its internal target of 1 billion weekly active ChatGPT users by the end of 2025. ChatGPT's share of generative AI web traffic collapsed from 86.7% a year ago to 64.5% in January. In the same window, Google's Gemini rose from 5.7% to 21.5%. They missed MULTIPLE monthly revenue targets earlier this year. They are losing ground to Anthropic in coding and to enterprise customers more broadly. Subscribers are leaving. Now hold that picture in your head and look at what they have committed to spend: Roughly $1.4 TRILLION in data center, GPU, and memory contracts. $300 billion to Oracle. $250 billion to Microsoft. $38 billion to Amazon. $90 billion to AMD. Tens of billions more to Broadcom, CoreWeave, and Nvidia. And Deutsche Bank estimates $143 billion in cumulative negative free cash flow between now and 2029. The CFO is not "worried" because she is conservative by nature. She is worried because she is doing the math. Here's the part the market hasn't yet processed: OpenAI is the marginal buyer for the ENTIRE AI infrastructure complex. - Oracle's $553 billion backlog is more than half OpenAI. - Nvidia's 2027 revenue assumptions lean heavily on OpenAI deployments. - AMD's "$90 billion in cumulative hardware revenue" claim from its OpenAI deal IS the OpenAI deal. - CoreWeave is essentially a leveraged bet on OpenAI's ability to pay. - Broadcom's custom silicon roadmap was built around OpenAI demand. If OpenAI cannot fund the contracts it has signed, every one of those numbers gets re-cut. Every Mag 7 capex slide gets re-cut. Every analyst model that uses "AI infrastructure demand" as a justification for trading the S&P 500 at 26x forward earnings gets re-cut. This is exactly what I've been calling the counterparty risk problem. You can't have a $1.4 trillion supply chain whose ultimate customer expects to LOSE $143 billion before it generates a dollar of free cash flow, and then pretend the suppliers carry no risk. Pre-market this morning told you the market is starting to figure it out: Rambus down. Marvell down. Oracle indicated down 4.5%. Nvidia, AMD, Broadcom under pressure. The chip complex understands that "OpenAI's CFO is worried" is not noise. It is the first crack in the financing structure that the entire AI trade rests on. This is just like the junk bonds in 1989, Telecom in 2000, or Subprime CDOs in 2007. The pattern is always the same: Outside skeptics raise the alarm and get ignored. Then someone inside the building tells the truth and the building empties. Sarah Friar just told the truth. The Mag 7 are literally priced for OpenAI delivering what its OWN CFO says it may not be able to pay for. Below is a video from February of last year - everything is aging TERRIBLY...

George Noble

25,935 views • 3 months ago