3 ms·

Great analogy. ;-) Doubt Jensen sees himself as a “dealer” but considering the vendor lock-in and margins, he pretty much is the Tony Montana of Ai Chips. It’

Great analogy. ;-) Doubt Jensen sees himself as a “dealer” but considering the vendor lock-in and margins, he pretty much is the Tony Montana of Ai Chips. It’s nuts that this type of financing is legal.

Aperocky 8mo ago
It is legal because Jensen isn't selling drugs, payday loans are legal too!
- lotsofpulp 8mo ago
  It’s legal because both sides have armies of lawyers and are voluntarily entering into contracts where each party gets consideration. How someone can compare the above situation to a person getting a payday loan to put a roof over their head or food on their plate is beyond me. The “it’s like <insert wild and inappropriate analogy to stoke emotion>” is a tired trope.
  - bandrami 8mo ago
    Come on, calling a round of vendor financing (which is what the NVIDIA money is) "funding" is eggregiously misleading. The only new money entering the sector from this is SoftBank's stake.
    - lotsofpulp 8mo ago
      They might have dressed up the wording, but the details are all there for anyone who wants to objectively look at the deal. It is a group of two executives making a non coerced deal and disclosing the required information to investors. Might be a stupid gamble, but it's not akin to a loan shark shaking down a hungry, cold person for life's essentials.
coliveira 8mo ago
It's like credit cards loaning money to people who are unemployed and will default on payments. It's a risky business that is legal and can be very profitable, but may also be disastrous in the future.
nradov 8mo ago
I don't see the problem as long as materially significant transactions by publicly traded companies are properly disclosed to investors. If someone loses money by buying NVDA then they have only themselves to blame.
- bandrami 8mo ago
  This is Jeremy Irons' argument in "Margin Call" too. But most people were unhappy with the secular result.
  - nradov 8mo ago
    Tuld wasn't wrong. There will always be financial bubbles and misallocation of capital. It can't be prevented, and even trying to prevent it would involve intrusive government overreach that would make most people even more unhappy. Investors who want safety are free to buy Treasuries.
torben-friis 8mo ago
>It’s nuts that this type of financing is legal. You need people to burn in house fires for regulation to require extinguishers. We're going to be the next generation’s cautionary tale.

Aperocky 8mo ago

It is legal because Jensen isn't selling drugs, payday loans are legal too!

lotsofpulp 8mo ago
It’s legal because both sides have armies of lawyers and are voluntarily entering into contracts where each party gets consideration. How someone can compare the above situation to a person getting a payday loan to put a roof over their head or food on their plate is beyond me. The “it’s like <insert wild and inappropriate analogy to stoke emotion>” is a tired trope.
- bandrami 8mo ago
  Come on, calling a round of vendor financing (which is what the NVIDIA money is) "funding" is eggregiously misleading. The only new money entering the sector from this is SoftBank's stake.
  - lotsofpulp 8mo ago
    They might have dressed up the wording, but the details are all there for anyone who wants to objectively look at the deal. It is a group of two executives making a non coerced deal and disclosing the required information to investors. Might be a stupid gamble, but it's not akin to a loan shark shaking down a hungry, cold person for life's essentials.

coliveira 8mo ago

It's like credit cards loaning money to people who are unemployed and will default on payments. It's a risky business that is legal and can be very profitable, but may also be disastrous in the future.

nradov 8mo ago

I don't see the problem as long as materially significant transactions by publicly traded companies are properly disclosed to investors. If someone loses money by buying NVDA then they have only themselves to blame.

bandrami 8mo ago
This is Jeremy Irons' argument in "Margin Call" too. But most people were unhappy with the secular result.
- nradov 8mo ago
  Tuld wasn't wrong. There will always be financial bubbles and misallocation of capital. It can't be prevented, and even trying to prevent it would involve intrusive government overreach that would make most people even more unhappy. Investors who want safety are free to buy Treasuries.

torben-friis 8mo ago

>It’s nuts that this type of financing is legal. You need people to burn in house fires for regulation to require extinguishers. We're going to be the next generation’s cautionary tale.