562
Nvidia insists it isn’t Enron, but its AI deals are testing investor faith
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
562 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
78098 readers
3093 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sell chips to X
Receive stock in X
Value of stocks = discounted sum of future (fake) income
Booked as an asset on the balance sheet
This is exactly like Enron but the underlying commodity isn't energy, it's compute.
Nvidia sells plenty of GPUs for actual money, they are good for it.
No, the real issue is the depreciation for the people owning GPUs. Your GPU will be usable for 4-6 years, and 2-4 of those years will be spent as ”the cheap old GPU. After that time, you need new GPUs. (And as the models are larger by then, you need moahr GPU)
How the actual fuck do these people expect to get any ROI on that scale with those timeframes? With training, maybe the trained model can be an asset (lol), but for inference there are basically no residual benefits.
enron sold plenty of gas and real things too: it’s the double handling that’s the problem; not the nature of the goods or services
The relative size of the double handling is the potential problem. I think Nvidia is just trying to extend the gold rush for a bit longer.
I feel like what sounds personally insane to us (and is, don't get the wrong idea), to the people making such decisions the situation is more like -
"Emerging market with unknown upside thanks to new and evolving capabilities, exploration and competitive advantage shaped and constrained, globally, by hardware capability. Not my money I'm betting, 'risk' is extreme opportunity for me, negative consequences borne by others. Let's go"
I'm still rocking a GTX970 from 2014
Do this:
You’ll probably end up with 4-6 years as the usable lifetime of your billion dollar investment. This entire industry is insane. (GTX 1080 here. Was considering an upgrade until the RAM prices hit.)
And the companies faking revenue instead of profit.