Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- I imagine nvidia is securing these loans on the hardware being bought?
So if the company defaults they can take the GPUs and servers etc and sell those.
by fsuts - can someone explain why this is actually bad?
nvidia spends X amount to invest in data centres or investments on the agreement that the counterparty spends Y amount back, the net delta is the actual amount of value being transferred aka Nvidia sells chips as usual despite the high numbers of X and Y?
The frontier labs do not have enough chips to meet demand, and AI demand is ferocious and climbing, so I'm not sure what the story is here
by vanuatu - its not so bad if the funds arent used to borrow 10x, and then spent entirely on nvidia chips.by javier2
- Its bad if the expected demand is an illusion. For example, when a company builds out a data center they don't build it for demand today, they build it for the demand they expect when the data center is running and for how much they expect demand to grow over the lifetime of the data center (this is a simplification, they build a financial model of how they can grow capacity as demand increases over the lifetime of the data center). If the demand is lower than expected then the counterparty cannot spend that Y amount back. In other words, Nvidia now holds bad debt (really worthless equity since these aren't loans on paper). Furthermore, Nvidia has been making the same bet with multiple companies. That Y amount the counterparty can't pay back is probably correlated with all of the counterparties Nvidia lent X amount to. Suddenly this circular flywheel begins operating in reverse. Now Nvidia has no X amounts to lend to AI companies which makes their ability to pay back Nvidia worse which means Nvidia has less money to lend out and on and on.
There's other problems too, why do we think AI demand is ferocious right now? Nvidia's revenue is one of the biggest signals we use to determine that. Why is Nvidia's revenue so large? They're spending their revenue on more revenue. This process overinflates what AI demand might actually be.
The issue really boils down to that this is a risk that gets reported in a way that makes it look less risky than it really is and therefore actors make investment decisions that they might not otherwise make. Sure, it might work out. But if it doesn't, the pain could be way more painful than it looks on paper.
by CoolestBeans - The problem is that when a vendor finances their customers, they can create the illusion of 'real' demand for their product, when most of the the end-users are only actually using something because it's cheap. When the vendor runs low on cash and starts requiring payment, the customer may not be able to afford it, taking both vendor and customer down, and leaving the end-users who have a real need, and were willing to pay sustainable prices without any options.by nickff
- It is far better for society when companies like Nvidia spend their money rather horde it like Apple.
Nobody (including the dragon) benefits from sitting on piles of gold.
- Apple is a $5t company that has $45b cash-on-hand.
Your post is "cute", but 3 or 4 months of operating cash isn't a great example of "sitting on piles of gold".
by pinkyboy - If anything this means that the insane amounts spent on AI are just mostly virtual speculative stock deals and in reality the amount spent in AI is kinda normal.by jurschreuder
- They are just adding zeros to already obnoxious numbers that make no sense. The endgame is on.
- by NegatioN
- Nvidia had a free cash flow last quarter of $48.5 billion, a 36% quarter-over-quarter increase. $750B does not seem that huge in comparison. (Yes, the gravy train could theoretically stop anytime, but that still seems like a large but localized unwind rather than a wider economic crash.)
If you were NVDA and had that much cash on hand and wanted to grow your business, where would you put it?
by keeda - At what point do I start taking money out of my VTI holdings and parking it in cash - there is no way the market keeps going up.by jdalgetty
- Market goes up when the dollar crashes you're fine
- Park it in BRK?by scrappyjoe
- There is no law that prices must revert to a mean.
The market can keep going up in dollar terms while losing real value if we enter a phase of high inflation.
by pianopatrick - Others have given practical replies, so here's a philosophical one: Sometimes it's just not practical to make much money from being right.
I want to acknowledge and empathize how much it sucks, while also putting it out there so that nobody suffers blaming themselves for something that might not be achievable.
Disclosure: I've been waiting-and-seeing too long myself, and I should probaby stop trying to time/strategize.
by Terr_ - Just need a larger emergency fund to mitigate the risk, especially if you work in tech and you feel the crash would heavily impact your labor earnings (including possibly extended unemployment)by fullshark
- Historically even if you invest into index at the worst possible time (prior to a crash) and keep holding you still outperform inflation long term. Timing the market is impossible. Just keep an emergency fund in a money market or savings account and hold the rest.by rjh29
- > there is no way the market keeps going up.
There is no way the US’s leaders let the prices of publicly traded securities go down or even stagnate relative to the US dollar. These publicly traded securities make up a significant portion of the US leaders’ and most active voters’ assets, plus almost all state and local US governments depend on the securities’ price growth to meet their deferred compensation obligations.
The alternative to risk in US securities isn’t the USD, it’s a stake in other stable countries with resources.
by lotsofpulp - First, don't park it in actual cash or you'll lose value to inflation which is currently running high. At a minimum put it in treasuries.
Second, trying to time the market is almost always a suboptimal strategy. The question is when will you likely need the money? If you won't need it for 10 years or more, keep it in index funds. Otherwise, treasuries.
by jshen - OPEN AI is living true to their name and foundation principles. Non profit and NO PROFIT, lol.by gla67890543
- Circular is a dumb way to describe it IMO, because it's not like both parties end up in the same place.
Nvidia is making trades for people to buy their GPUs.
Sometimes companies are trading stock for GPUs, sometimes money, other times something else.
In summary, Nvidia is selling GPUs.
by randyrand - Nope. The simplest rebuttal to all of this is: why dont they pay cash?
- are you just heavily invested in Nvidia to not see this as problematic?by Marciplan
- Looks like you discovered an infinite money glitch! As long as you’re selling things at a profit, all you need to do is take those profits and give them to your customers to buy more things, repeat the loop a few times and you can become a billionaire food vlogger just like Jensenby wonnage
- They're selling GPUs in exchange for scrip which may or may not be able to pay Nvidia's operating expenses depending on whether AI has a profitable business model. This isn't hard to understand.by Analemma_
- Its only a problem if you think about it, just don't think about it and no problem!by georgemcbay
- It's circular in the same way you'd describe the whirlpool created by an emptying bathtub. Round and round it spins, sucking in external cash to sustain it.
Without continued external investment, the cycle stops, and we all learn what "too big to fail" looks like this time.
by oliwarner - Yeah, the "circular" language is obviously intended to imply unsustainability, as a system without external inputs must eventually run down. But this system is intended to have external inputs, revenue from customers that buy the services of the data centers. So the fundamental issue is just whether there will be enough such demand to justify the scale of the build-out.
These deals give Nvidia more exposure to that, in both directions. Certainly Nvidia shareholders should be cognizant of this. But nothing structurally problematic is occurring here.
by no_op - Right. The risk isn't accounting fraud, its the equity-to-debt loop that relies on all these companies making "enough money to pay it back someday."
Nvidia invests, that equity check gets used to secure 10x it in debt with the GPUs as collateral, and then they buy the chips.
Nvidia gets paid, so they don't hold the debt liability. But, if AI revenue doesn't cover those debt payments before the GPUs depreciate, the loop starts to unravel, and fast. CoreWeave, Oracle, all the "neoclouds" etc. will blow up, and there could potentially be a ton of PE debt that is now under-collateralized due to depreciation, causing a pretty big haircut to basically all of private credit.
by thewebguyd