←back to thread

387 points reaperducer | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.416s | source
Show context
jacquesm ◴[] No.45772081[source]
These kinds of deals were very much a la mode just prior to the .com crash. Companies would buy advertising, then the websites and ad agencies would buy their services and they'd spend it again on advertising. The end result is immense revenues without profits.
replies(6): >>45772090 #>>45772213 #>>45772293 #>>45772318 #>>45772433 #>>45774073 #
1. boringg ◴[] No.45774073[source]
The original "Tech" boom was an infrastructure boom by the telecoms funded by leveraged debt. It was an overbuild mismatch with the market timing. If you brought forward the timeline to when that infrastructure was used (late 2000s) you probably would never have had the crash.

This boom is a data center boom with AI being the software layer/driver. This one potentially has a lot longer to run even though everyone is freaking out now. If you believe the AI is rebuilding compute then this changes our compute paradigm in the future. As well as long as we don't get an over leveraged build out without revenue coming in the door. I think we are seeing a lot of revenue come in for certain applications.

The companies that are all smoke and mirrors built on chatGPT with little defensibility are probably the same as the ones you are referring to in the current era. Or the AI tooling companies.

To be clear circular deal flow is not a good look.

I can see the both sides of bull and bear at this moment.

replies(1): >>45776367 #
2. cman1444 ◴[] No.45776367[source]
One interesting aspect of this is that, with the exception of OpenAI, all of the companies leading this boom generate massive amounts of income from other arms of their buinesses. I think this is one reason for the potentially longer run, since they can subsidize AI CapEx with these cash flows for quite a while.