162
Points
152
Comments
1vuio0pswjnm7
Author

Top Comments

tedgghJul 23
The current commitment by hyperscalers is around 1.7T USD, reported liabilities 1.3T and this year global debt related to AI is 570B. So that’s around 3T total. For this to make sense AI must generate 2T in new revenue per year by the end of the decade. And that would be only a 10% ROIC. For context ROIC for big tech is around 35% so at 10% they will be barely breaking even. The SP500 gives 10-12%. With 10% ROIC from AI the only thing investors will be celebrating is that the whole thing didn’t trigger a financial crisis. Data centers are NOT real estate. Buildings and power lines usually last 30-50 years. GPUs become obsolete in 5 years. If hyperscalers need to refinance and their interest rate goes up there’s zero margin for error.
paxysJul 23
These alarms have been going off for a long time now. Everyone is already in too deep to admit that there’s a problem.
epistasisJul 23
I'm thinking Apple has been really smart in their AI strategy here.

It seems a mistake to make unprecedentedly large capital expenditures, in a very very crowded space, without much evidence of a moat. Presumably people thought the moat would be singularity-like self-improvement of AI, but the singularity is merely a religious concept, and nobody should take religious myth as fact, it's merely narrative for orientation and inspiration.

ZigurdJul 23
Looking at cash burn is looking at the wrong end of the horse. Some companies, like Meta, have burned huge piles of cash in pursuit of, for example, the Metaverse and they've got nothing to show for it, not even a slight increment in ad tech, and yet they earned enough to shrug it off.

There's a big difference between Google spending tens of billions on AI infrastructure and what Oracle is doing. Oracle is spending to get on a bandwagon. Google is transforming their business, so far seemingly correctly. If AI flops big-time, Google will be left with some stranded assets, but it won't be existential the way it would be to Oracle.

gavin_geeJul 23
i dont understand the concern. they are putting up great financials. you have to invest ahead of the outcome. this is just classic quarterly public company earnings BS, where public markets dont reward innovation investment. they just want crank the handle financials.

The bigger issue is on the model front, can Google compete; Gemini doesnt seem to be able to compete on the heavy expert end; they are doing well on lighter faster models.

khursJul 23
How does this spend affect Google CEO's $692 Million potential pay? Is it meeting the required goals or taking him away from them?

https://fortune.com/2026/03/10/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-692-...

CentigonalJul 23
They just raised $85 billion and they're sitting on a mountain of cash - if their spending didn't increase in this context, it'd be bad management. The real story here is that they have decided to spend that mountain of cash on AI CapEx.
seydorJul 23
Haven't they announced the spending like, years ago? Is the market deaf and blind now too?
Visit the Original Link

Read the full content on reuters.com

Source
reuters.com
Author
1vuio0pswjnm7
Posted
July 23, 2026 at 01:10 PM


More Top Stories

eso.org Jul 23
Astronomers may have found the first exomoon
5424 commentsby MarcoDewey
Details
werd.io Jul 23
Private healthcare makes industries less innovative. It's time for change
8648 commentsby benwerd
Details
haqr.eu Jul 23
Software rendering in 500 lines of bare C++
285 commentsby mpweiher
Details
futurism.com Jul 23
AI Companies Are Trying to Hide a Staggering Amount of Debt
17584 commentsby technewssss
Details
veryfineprint.substack.com Jul 17
Scanning for Pangram Errors
3921 commentsby jsnell
Details
chatgpt.com Jul 22
Terence Tao's ChatGPT conversation about the Jacobian Conjecture counterexample
1016583 commentsby gmays
Details
👋 Need help with code?