正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

SF Compute CEO evan conrad explains why GPU clusters are bad collateral for lenders: "This article was more of a prediction of a trend that is already happening. I probably should’ve said, currently, most startups cannot buy compute. It is only getting harder and harder and harder." "If you...

17,071 次观看 • 3 天前 •via X (Twitter)

9 条评论

Kushal Mungee 的头像
Kushal Mungee3 天前

@evanjconrad Interesting how @sfcompute addresses this by not owning the hardware itself but basically operating everything around it, so that the lender can claim "operational chips" as collateral rather than just the hardware itself

brexton 的头像
brexton3 天前

@evanjconrad Inject this into my veins

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

GPUs aren’t inherently bad collateral. Opaque, unverified, and illiquid collateral is difficult to finance. Better data won’t eliminate credit risk. But it can make risk measurable, transparent, and more manageable. The answer isn’t to declare GPU financing broken. It’s to build the market infrastructure. We’re still in the very early innings. 🚀

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

4) Third, correlated credit risk. This is where I agree most. If neoclouds default during a compute downturn, GPU prices may fall exactly when lenders need to liquidate. That’s real wrong-way risk. But aviation, shipping, energy, and real estate financing face similar challenges.

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

@evanjconrad 1) I agree with @evanjconrad on correlated risk in GPU financing. But I disagree that GPUs are inherently bad collateral. We’re mixing up 3 different problems: Asset valuation risk Recovery/liquidation risk Borrower credit risk Let’s break them down. 🧵

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

5) We don’t conclude aircraft or ships are inherently unfinanceable. We build valuation standards, collateral monitoring, secondary markets, and appropriate financing structures. AI compute needs the same financial infrastructure. That’s what we’ve been building at @silicondata.

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

3) Second, liquidation. A functioning GPU cluster may be worth more than disconnected servers. Evan is right. But saying nobody wants to buy the hardware is too broad. There IS a secondary GPU market. @computeexchange The questions are: At what price? How quickly? At what redeployment cost? Liquidity isn’t binary. It has a price.

Carmen Li 的头像
Carmen Li2 天前

@evanjconrad 2) First, valuation. What’s an H100 or B200 worth today? What will it be worth in 12, 24, or 36 months? Without independent pricing, residual value benchmarks, and performance verification, lenders are underwriting with incomplete information. That’s a market data problem.

Kuldeep Pisda 的头像
Kuldeep Pisda2 天前

@evanjconrad correlated risk is why the contract matters more than the box, a take-or-pay offtake from a solid buyer is what made solar farms financeable

相关视频

When I sold my software company in 2010 and became an angel investor, one word could smother a pitch on the spot: “Hardware”. A hardware component made you close to unfundable. The VCs called you a hybrid company, and it wasn't a compliment. The refrain was: “Hardware is hard, hardware is slow, hardware eats cash and stretches timelines. We want pure software”. That was the era. It took two shocks to break the spell. First, COVID broke supply chains, and soon everyone in Washington was doing the math on where things actually get made. For example, the US hasn’t produced tungsten domestically since 2015 . (Aside: this is changing, cc Taylor Sulik ⛏️ ) Rare earth magnets: almost all bought from countries that may or may not be on our side. The ability to make critical materials at home was a national capability that we’d spent decades letting rot. That lit a fire under a lot of folks. Then AI showed up and knocked the legs out from under pure software entirely. The nightmare scenario for a lot of SaaS companies is now the next model dropping and a customer rebuilding your product in-house. So the same VCs who said "we don't want any hardware in this" are now asking founders where the hardware is. Which brings me to moats. A moat has always been a rebuild-time question: how long would it take a well-funded competitor to rebuild what you have? Software used to buy you years. AI is shrinking that number toward months, and a moat measured in months is more like a wooden fence. The physical world doesn't compress that way, since time is baked into its advantages. A factory takes three to five years to stand up regardless of how smart your tools get. Then permits, construction, supply chains, testing data… Another part is that AI trains on the written-down world, and high-moat physical knowledge lives largely offline… public AI models have not yet ingested it, and no prompt can reproduce the underlying empirical record. Anyway, hardware is still damn hard. And that's exactly the point.

Adam Rossi

11,932 次观看 • 3 个月前