5 ms·
You seem to misunderstand the dot com bubble. Sure, there were companies like Pets.com and companies adding an 'e' to the beginning of their names. But there w
by 01100011 3y ago
You seem to misunderstand the dot com bubble. Sure, there were companies like Pets.com and companies adding an 'e' to the beginning of their names. But there were also companies like Cisco and Sun Microsystems. Companies making profits selling real goods needed by the growing internet. Go look up those companies and their stock charts. Also, if you think random companies aren't mentioning AI to boost their stock you haven't been paying much attention.
- killjoywashere 3y agoCisco peaked at $77.00 in March 2000. It's currently $50.00. In the interim there have been no splits. Intel peaked at $73.94 in September 2000. It's currently $28.99. In the interim there have been no splits. NVidia has split 5 times (cumulative 48x) since 2000. It closed 2000 around $2.92. It is currently $389.93. Totally gain 6400x. If you ignore the last 12 months, NVidia's last peak was $315 in 2021, for a total gain of 5178x. -ish.
- startupsfail 3y agoAsk GPT-4, maybe it will say that this is not that unreasonable. Artificial intelligence is might be once-in-a-civilization-lifetime event.
- luckman212 3y ago"On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero."
- bagacrap 3y agoI'm concerned that if AI really lives up to the hype that retail investors are thinking, it's more of a civilization ending event than some sort of ascension to heaven. Meanwhile the hedge funds and institutional investors are just trying to ride the momentum while it lasts, which could be for a while.
- pfannkuchen 3y agoI imagine we might be looking at different points in each company’s lifecycle? Nvidia was founded in the 90s. If we look at intel’s stock over the same range relative to the start of the company, what happens then? Feels like this comparison is not that relevant to the dot com bubble and whether AI is similar.
- jeffwass 3y agoLooks like you’re double-counting the splits.
- killjoywashere 3y agoNo, they just did a couple unusual splits: https://www.stocksplithistory.com/nvidia/ https://www.stocksplithistory.com/nvidia/
- jeffwass 3y agoThe $2.92 price you mentioned as closing the year 2000 is almost certainly split-adjusted.
- mikeweiss 3y agoWhy wouldn't you just reference market cap instead of share price..... Ugh
- kenjackson 3y agoI think you misunderstood my point. My thesis was that these two eras were different in scope (my first sentence). I was pointing out how the .com booms impact was so much larger than the current AI boom, in terms of financial impact. I wasn't trying to say the .com boom was smaller or more well-reasoned. In fact quite the opposite. I don't think we've seen comparable spikes to the .com boom yet, and you seem to agree.
- ethbr0 3y agoIf we're going to see an AI spike and bust, we're just at the beginning of it. Nvidia is pricing on actual revenue growth (~16%?) and projected growth (~20%). Since 2016 they've been killing it. AI will turn into a bubble when unrelated companies begin being priced like that, without historical or current revenue growth to back up their projections, simply by virtue of being AI-associated.
- bagacrap 3y agoSomehow other companies with that growth don't get priced at 30 times sales.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]