20 comments

  • silverFork 11 minutes ago
    A la Enron but completely legal. It is not just a circle, it is more like a swirl. Wallstreet invested in Ai Farms to purchase NVDA chips and then NVDA invested in Ai Farms and not only that it is investing in its customer, Anthropic and its IPO.. They are recycling the cash that they harvest from stock markets till it becomes the famous singularity in funding like a financial hurricane.
    • JumpCrisscross 7 minutes ago
      > Enron but completely legal

      Nvidia's financing is disclosed. Enron lied about its schemes. I've also seen zero evidence that Nvidia is extending this credit to related parties to put in sham orders–that was part of Enron's shtick, too.

    • nxjdjdkdkfkf 6 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • vardump 34 minutes ago
    I first read that "every $1T brings back $100", thinking, wow, is it THAT bad?

    No, it's very unlikely at this point every $1 Nvidia invests brings back $100. Stating something like that is almost a red flag that things are overheating.

    • nerbert 18 minutes ago
      Every $1 they invest brings back $100 in their valuation maybe.
    • thousand_nights 9 minutes ago
      > The figure was rhetorical, not a disclosed 100-times investment return.

      seems no one is reading the article..

  • iammjm 43 minutes ago
    Where are those 99$ coming from? Who is actually paying this money? Because it seems like so far everybody is losing money with no reversal of this trend in sight
    • JumpCrisscross 26 minutes ago
      > Where are those 99$ coming from?

      If this isn't a house of cards, AI companies' customers. The companies and individauls ponying up for a Claude subscription or compute through OpenRouter.

      Customer financing isn't inherently fucked. It's just highly suspect at the scale Nvidia's doing it. There was another thread where I noted that Nvidia's investments are literally monetarily significant, to the point that I expect them to start being directly referenced in the Fed's beige book [1].

      [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49673871

    • fc417fc802 34 minutes ago
      And this is the actual problem. I can't see framing it as a ratio as anything other than an attempt to mislead. What do you predict will happen when the market deflates? Whether or not a segment will behave like a line of dominoes and catastrophically implode is the question.

      As I understand it they are risking that even if the major AI labs fail all the compute capacity that's been built out will remain in demand at sufficiently high prices.

    • jstummbillig 4 minutes ago
      > Where are those 99$ coming from? Who is actually paying this money?

      Companies who pay 99$ to make >99$ in return. I am not saying it works in all cases but that's the idea when you pay for stuff as a Company.

      > Because it seems like so far everybody is losing money with no reversal of this trend in sight

      I am not sure what you are seeing. Anthropic (as one of only two major companies that do just AI) is starting to return profits, while demand for AI is accelerating and, clearly, compute is maxed out. And I mean: On the entire planet. They are turning profits despite being in full buildout mode.

    • marginalia_nu 42 minutes ago
      Inflated valuations, mostly.
      • petcat 19 minutes ago
        The current valuations are only inflated until they're not. Especially if the big American labs can convince the US government to work out a joint "AI non-proliferation" agreement with China which will allow both countries to essentially carve up and techno-colonize the rest of the world without any other competition except between themselves.

        We're already seeing signs of this strategy from Open AI and Anthropic warning about the dangers of AI and the need for safety regulations. None of that stuff matters if China is not also on board with it.

        • marginalia_nu 10 minutes ago
          > The current valuations are only inflated until they're not

          You could say that about any historically inflated valuation all the way back to the tulip mania. Either the expected profit materializes or it doesn't.

          > We're already seeing signs of this strategy from Open AI and Anthropic warning about the dangers of AI and the need for safety regulations

          I would read this as a desire to pause training to be able to present a profit in anticipation of the IPO. The major AI labs mad scramble to IPO is if anything a sign that they aren't at all confident in the valuation. If they were they would be no hurry to cash out.

    • simianwords 27 minutes ago
      You do realise it’s not a fixed pie right?
  • bhouston 30 minutes ago
    It is a bit circular but it also a growing real market. NVIDIA is accelerating the market and also making money. It is a smart strategy on their part.

    We are not at the top of this trend yet so I do not see this as over investment.

    I remember the criticism Microsoft got for investing in Facebook/Meta that gave them a whooping $15B valuation and getting 1.7% in 2007. Not all deals will turn out that prescient but a few will and make up for any duds. This is a real market.

    • BunsanSpace 10 minutes ago
      > It is a smart strategy on their part.

      No, it's a high risk gamble.

      If the market grows enough they will win the bet, but if the market doesn't or we get a recession that dries up capital they will be holding the bag.

      • Avicebron 3 minutes ago
        > If the market grows enough they will win the bet

        So for this to become true there are some number of jobs that that pay $N salary are replaced completely by LLMs that do the job for $N-0.01?

        Is that what you mean by "market grows enough"

      • bhouston 5 minutes ago
        > No, it's a high risk gamble.

        Even in a recession I think the shift towards AI would just accelerate since it is usually cheaper than humans.

        The real risk I feel if what if AI is too successful and there is a lack of human demand because of dropping wages/employment?

        (Then I wonder if sentient robot demand will make up for it? Although I realize that veers into science fiction futures.)

  • blitzar 39 minutes ago
    I don't know about $100 back ... but their profit margin is $0.90 on the gpu that is bought with the $1 they lend / swap for equity + they get ongoing interest / equity stake.

    Its a mighty fine deal for Nvidia

  • Ekaros 25 minutes ago
    So if they just had spare 100 billion they could make 10 trillion? Sounds reasonable and plausible right? Sadly market manipulation is not being prosecuted.
    • hyperionultra 22 minutes ago
      After the downfall - it will be prosecutable. Of course before that we (simpletons) will have to pay for those companies to avoid “economic collapse”.
  • nicman23 45 minutes ago
    are those 100$ in the room with us right now
    • dgellow 42 minutes ago
      They are definitely in NVIDIA’s own rooms! It’s like, they invest $1 in AI companies, that pay back NVIDIA $100 for GPUs. If you draw the lines you will see something that looks a bit like an ellipse. Or maybe a boomerang path. Or like, a 2d sphere. A bit frustrating we don’t have a simpler word for such a shape
  • wartywhoa23 44 minutes ago
    Those $99, where do they come from?
    • __patchbit__ 11 minutes ago
      The future we want. Not the wasteful F-35 'Fat Amy' lemon future noone except the fighterjet mafia wants..
    • brianpane 23 minutes ago
    • rwmj 25 minutes ago
      Shush there! Don't ask any difficult questions!
    • OroPla 23 minutes ago
      The Fed is printing them. Just like they print all other money.

      From the article:

      > I put in one, and a hundred comes back.”

      > The figure was rhetorical, not a disclosed 100-times investment return.

      There's a lot more words in there, but it doesn't seem to say anything else.

  • alexdns 47 minutes ago
    nvidia invests $1 in AI company , datacenters with GPUs , AI company / datacenters buy $x worth of GPUs from NVIDIA , in a circle
    • david-gpu 35 minutes ago
      Isn't vendor financing a common business practice to finance the cost of equipment? What makes it nefarious in this instance?
  • ozgrakkurt 10 minutes ago
    Like a grade school student claiming they peed for 10 minutes straight yesterday
  • youoy 44 minutes ago
    Woah, better than Madoff! How can i give him money?
  • fwlr 5 minutes ago

       It’s not circular because we put a little bit of money in, and a lot of money comes back
    
    Ah yes, it’s not circular, because it’s a pyramid.
  • RugnirViking 28 minutes ago
    Amazed by these comments?

    Yes, it seems very possible to me that Nvidia makes a lot of money. They are literally the largest company in the world.

    Who pays? Only all the companies, desperately raising as much capital as possible, issuing new stock to do it, going for unprecedented investment rounds, burning cash reserves to fund the largest data centre rollout in history.

    Who builds the things that go into said datacenters? The thing that has also raised in price dramatically in recent years?

    • Ekaros 15 minutes ago
      It is always about scale. At scale today's Nvidia does anything is so big that 100x is not anymore reasonable. Or then it is not significant...

      From sub million to hundreds of millions I could theoretically see. Even tens of millions to billions. And even then I would be extremely skeptical.

      But with Nvidia we are talking somewhere in the scale at tens or hundreds of billions. And that is actually very large sums of money. Even if it often does not look like it.

    • rwmj 26 minutes ago
      In a very narrow sense it may be true that Nvidia expects to make some multiple of the money invested (unlikely to be 100x but whatever). But you can't talk about that without talking about the wider economy. If the wider economy, and especially the pension funds putting money into the scheme, cannot sustain this, it'll eventually collapse and then everyone including Nvidia will lose lots and lots of money.
    • draw_down 20 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • Eddy_Viscosity2 11 minutes ago
    10,000% growth! No way that could be wild claim! How dare we doubt them.
  • sajithdilshan 33 minutes ago
    100$ for every 1$ invested would definitely be branded as a ponzi scheme if it was done by a regular Joe
  • vrganj 31 minutes ago
    You see, it's not a circle, it's a pyramid! Just buy in right now and you'll get unprecedented returns! Nothing could possibly go wrong!

    My name is Charles Ponzi and I approve of this message.

  • andrepd 33 minutes ago
    Reads like satire. "I get 100$ for every 1$ I put in" is exactly the kind of phrase that triggers ponzi alarm bells on anybody reading this x)
  • behnamoh 46 minutes ago
    Nvidia is full of shit. Leatherman thinks Astra = AGI.
  • Flavius 30 minutes ago
    So for every trillion that was invested, 100 trillion were made. Got it.
  • DarmokTanagra 27 minutes ago
    [dead]