WEBVTT - Part One: NVIDIA Isn't Enron - So What Is It?

0:00:02.800 --> 0:00:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Zone Media.

0:00:05.519 --> 0:00:20.720
<v Speaker 2>Hello, and welcome to this week's Better Offline. I'm ed Zetra. Now.

0:00:20.720 --> 0:00:22.560
<v Speaker 2>At the end of November, and Video put out an

0:00:22.600 --> 0:00:26.000
<v Speaker 2>internal memo that tried to well get ahead of a

0:00:26.040 --> 0:00:28.840
<v Speaker 2>few things, is how I'd put it, that had been

0:00:28.880 --> 0:00:31.560
<v Speaker 2>bubbling up in the news, specifically comparisons to Enron, the

0:00:31.600 --> 0:00:34.199
<v Speaker 2>massive energy trading giant that imploded in the early two

0:00:34.200 --> 0:00:37.519
<v Speaker 2>thousands after well a lot of fraud, also with some

0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:41.000
<v Speaker 2>other concerns about its earnings. Said memo was leaked to

0:00:41.120 --> 0:00:43.479
<v Speaker 2>Baron's reporter Take Him, who is one of the largest

0:00:43.479 --> 0:00:46.920
<v Speaker 2>in video boosters in the known universe. He posts constantly

0:00:46.960 --> 0:00:49.040
<v Speaker 2>about how Invidio is going to be the biggest, most

0:00:49.080 --> 0:00:51.199
<v Speaker 2>hugess company in the world. He's meant to be like

0:00:51.240 --> 0:00:53.880
<v Speaker 2>an analyst and a reporter, but he mostly just seems

0:00:53.920 --> 0:00:58.000
<v Speaker 2>like a cheerleader and it's kind of embarrassing. Now, nevertheless,

0:00:58.000 --> 0:01:01.000
<v Speaker 2>he was leaking a memo that was quite worrisome, so

0:01:02.080 --> 0:01:04.800
<v Speaker 2>oh no, and Vidio chose to disseminate it through him,

0:01:04.840 --> 0:01:08.160
<v Speaker 2>but also to short sellers. The actual providence of this,

0:01:08.360 --> 0:01:10.319
<v Speaker 2>or is it providence? I don't know, but someone will

0:01:10.319 --> 0:01:14.440
<v Speaker 2>correct me is kind of confusing anyway, long story short,

0:01:14.480 --> 0:01:17.560
<v Speaker 2>people have a few concerns about in Nvidia, and well

0:01:17.680 --> 0:01:20.560
<v Speaker 2>you shouldn't. Though, you shouldn't have any concerns at all,

0:01:20.600 --> 0:01:24.039
<v Speaker 2>because in video's very secret, not to be leaked immediately.

0:01:24.080 --> 0:01:28.120
<v Speaker 2>Document spent thousands of words very specifically explaining how in

0:01:28.240 --> 0:01:31.800
<v Speaker 2>video was fine, and most importantly, by the way, nothing

0:01:31.880 --> 0:01:34.319
<v Speaker 2>like Enron. Now why did I need to say all

0:01:34.319 --> 0:01:36.800
<v Speaker 2>of this? And why did Nvidia need to sell of this?

0:01:36.920 --> 0:01:37.200
<v Speaker 1>Well?

0:01:37.440 --> 0:01:39.400
<v Speaker 2>In Vidio wrote this note as a response to both

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:42.360
<v Speaker 2>short seller Michael Burry, famous of course from The Big

0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:45.240
<v Speaker 2>Short and Sound Capitol. There's a whole bunch of other

0:01:45.280 --> 0:01:47.920
<v Speaker 2>stuff there, but putting that aside, but also because of

0:01:47.960 --> 0:01:51.000
<v Speaker 2>another thing, a guy called Shinaka and Slim Pereira, who

0:01:51.040 --> 0:01:53.520
<v Speaker 2>wrote a piece called, and I quote the algorithm that

0:01:53.600 --> 0:01:56.400
<v Speaker 2>detected the six hundred and ten billion dollar fraud, how

0:01:56.440 --> 0:02:00.800
<v Speaker 2>machine intelligence exposed the AI industry's circular finance scheme. And

0:02:00.840 --> 0:02:03.200
<v Speaker 2>I've now been sent this about eleven times maybe more

0:02:03.240 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 2>since it came out.

0:02:04.720 --> 0:02:04.960
<v Speaker 1>Now.

0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:07.360
<v Speaker 2>The reason I'm not going to link to Pereira's piece

0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:10.160
<v Speaker 2>in the show notes or in the companion newsletter to

0:02:10.160 --> 0:02:13.480
<v Speaker 2>this episode is simple. It's full of bullshit, and I've

0:02:13.639 --> 0:02:17.040
<v Speaker 2>had some very good reporters linked to this thing. I've

0:02:17.200 --> 0:02:19.160
<v Speaker 2>heard from a lot of people say all this scared me,

0:02:19.200 --> 0:02:21.120
<v Speaker 2>and the fact it's scared in video really pissed me

0:02:21.160 --> 0:02:24.200
<v Speaker 2>off too, because it's straight up got lies in it,

0:02:24.280 --> 0:02:27.240
<v Speaker 2>like made up stuff. I'm not even talking just misstatements.

0:02:27.280 --> 0:02:31.240
<v Speaker 2>I'm talking about really specific things. It's made up. For example,

0:02:31.480 --> 0:02:35.120
<v Speaker 2>in one part, Perera talks about major semiconductor distributor Arrow

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:38.399
<v Speaker 2>Electronics stating things and it's Q three twenty twenty five

0:02:38.400 --> 0:02:41.840
<v Speaker 2>earnings about in video. Let me be fucking clear about this.

0:02:41.919 --> 0:02:44.840
<v Speaker 2>Really pissed me off. Arrow makes no statements of any

0:02:44.960 --> 0:02:48.240
<v Speaker 2>kind about in video on its earnings calls, in its

0:02:48.280 --> 0:02:51.920
<v Speaker 2>ten Q or its earnings presentation. You can go and look.

0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:54.560
<v Speaker 2>He doesn't link to anything. By the way, and if

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:57.480
<v Speaker 2>you need another example, Prera claims that when in Vidia

0:02:57.560 --> 0:03:00.120
<v Speaker 2>launched the Hopper H one hundred architecture in Q two

0:03:00.160 --> 0:03:04.160
<v Speaker 2>fiscal twenty twenty three, also amid reported supply constraints in

0:03:04.200 --> 0:03:07.480
<v Speaker 2>strong demand, inventory declined eighteen percent quarter of a quarter

0:03:07.520 --> 0:03:11.320
<v Speaker 2>as the company fulfilled backloged orders. If you bothered to

0:03:11.360 --> 0:03:13.640
<v Speaker 2>go and look at a videa's inventory from that period,

0:03:13.720 --> 0:03:16.120
<v Speaker 2>which is public. By the way, you can see that

0:03:16.280 --> 0:03:19.000
<v Speaker 2>inventory increase. Now, I'm not pissed off at anyone listening

0:03:19.000 --> 0:03:21.440
<v Speaker 2>to this. I'm pissed off at any financial media that

0:03:21.520 --> 0:03:24.000
<v Speaker 2>gave this any kind of attention. And I'm kind of

0:03:24.000 --> 0:03:26.320
<v Speaker 2>pissed off at in Video for doing it too. It's

0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:29.799
<v Speaker 2>aislop and I've not heard of Brera before, but as

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:32.240
<v Speaker 2>LinkedIn says, he is, and I'm not shitting you. The

0:03:32.320 --> 0:03:37.120
<v Speaker 2>CEO at pet Express Sri Lanka, I would suggest getting

0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:40.200
<v Speaker 2>your financial advice elsewhere and at a minimum, making sure

0:03:40.200 --> 0:03:44.120
<v Speaker 2>that you read out lets that actually source their data. Anyway,

0:03:44.320 --> 0:03:46.760
<v Speaker 2>as you're probably working out, all of this is fine

0:03:46.840 --> 0:03:51.280
<v Speaker 2>and normal. This happens normally all the time. Companies do

0:03:51.400 --> 0:03:54.920
<v Speaker 2>this all the time, especially successful ones. And there's nothing

0:03:54.960 --> 0:03:58.200
<v Speaker 2>to be worried about here, because after reading all seven

0:03:58.240 --> 0:04:00.640
<v Speaker 2>pages of this document, we can all read that Invidia

0:04:00.760 --> 0:04:05.080
<v Speaker 2>is nothing like Enron. No really though, in Video is

0:04:05.120 --> 0:04:07.840
<v Speaker 2>nothing like Enron. And it's kind of weird that anyone,

0:04:08.000 --> 0:04:10.960
<v Speaker 2>especially you, by the way, as saying that Enron and

0:04:11.080 --> 0:04:14.480
<v Speaker 2>Nvidia have any similarities at all. They just put out

0:04:14.640 --> 0:04:18.280
<v Speaker 2>a very long document, by the way, and it says

0:04:18.279 --> 0:04:20.520
<v Speaker 2>they're not Enron. Why do you keep asking about Enron.

0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:23.840
<v Speaker 2>All right, why are you being weird? Okay, Now, in

0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:27.920
<v Speaker 2>Vidia said something about Enron, but that's because fools and

0:04:28.000 --> 0:04:30.400
<v Speaker 2>vagabonds keep suggesting that in Video was like Enron, and

0:04:30.480 --> 0:04:33.520
<v Speaker 2>very normally in Vidia has decided thousands of words at

0:04:33.560 --> 0:04:37.160
<v Speaker 2>a time to set the records straight, and I genuinely

0:04:37.240 --> 0:04:40.560
<v Speaker 2>no jokes do agree in Vidia is nothing like Enron.

0:04:41.040 --> 0:04:43.120
<v Speaker 2>Putting aside how I might feel about the ethics or

0:04:43.200 --> 0:04:46.600
<v Speaker 2>underlying economics of Generative AI, in Vidia is an incredibly

0:04:46.640 --> 0:04:50.440
<v Speaker 2>successful business that has incredible profits, holds an effective monopoly

0:04:50.480 --> 0:04:53.000
<v Speaker 2>on Kouda, which powers the underlying software layer to running

0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:57.200
<v Speaker 2>software on GPUs, specifically Generative AI, and not really much

0:04:57.240 --> 0:05:00.440
<v Speaker 2>else that has any kind of revenue potential. Now talked

0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:02.560
<v Speaker 2>a bit about Cooder and the Hater's Guide to in Video,

0:05:02.600 --> 0:05:04.719
<v Speaker 2>which I've linked to in the show notes, And yes,

0:05:04.760 --> 0:05:06.400
<v Speaker 2>while I believe that one day this will all be

0:05:06.440 --> 0:05:08.440
<v Speaker 2>seen as one of the most egregious wastes of capital

0:05:08.440 --> 0:05:11.719
<v Speaker 2>of all time, for the time being, Jensen Huang is

0:05:12.320 --> 0:05:17.440
<v Speaker 2>potentially the greatest salesperson of all time. Nevertheless, people have

0:05:17.520 --> 0:05:20.000
<v Speaker 2>somewhat run away with the idea that Invidia is Enron,

0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:22.480
<v Speaker 2>in part because of the weird circular deals in videos

0:05:22.520 --> 0:05:26.440
<v Speaker 2>built with NEO clouds, dedicated AI focused cloud companies like

0:05:26.520 --> 0:05:29.520
<v Speaker 2>cor We've, Lambda and Nebius, who run data centers full

0:05:29.560 --> 0:05:33.320
<v Speaker 2>of GPUs sold by a video, which they then use

0:05:33.360 --> 0:05:36.040
<v Speaker 2>as collateral for loans to buy more GPUs from in video.

0:05:36.120 --> 0:05:39.599
<v Speaker 2>I can see why people are a little concerned. But

0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:43.880
<v Speaker 2>as dodgy and weird and unsustainable as this all is,

0:05:43.920 --> 0:05:47.440
<v Speaker 2>it isn't illegal in it certainly isn't Enron because in video,

0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:51.000
<v Speaker 2>as I've been trying to tell you, is nothing like Enron.

0:05:51.680 --> 0:05:53.640
<v Speaker 2>Now you may be a little confused. I get it

0:05:53.839 --> 0:05:57.480
<v Speaker 2>that Invidia is bringing up Enron at all. Nobody seriously

0:05:57.520 --> 0:06:00.880
<v Speaker 2>thought that in video was like Enron, not even the

0:06:00.880 --> 0:06:04.040
<v Speaker 2>psygonomous and analyst just Daurio, who has been questioning its

0:06:04.040 --> 0:06:07.479
<v Speaker 2>accounting practices for years. Because Enron was genuinely one of

0:06:07.480 --> 0:06:10.680
<v Speaker 2>the largest criminal enterprises in history, and Nvidia is, at worst,

0:06:11.240 --> 0:06:14.400
<v Speaker 2>I believe, a bit dodgy and doing whatever it can

0:06:14.440 --> 0:06:19.960
<v Speaker 2>to survive through various forms of accountancy alchemy. Wait, wait,

0:06:20.720 --> 0:06:23.720
<v Speaker 2>you still think in Vidia is Enron? What's it going

0:06:23.760 --> 0:06:25.400
<v Speaker 2>to take to convince you? I just told you that

0:06:25.440 --> 0:06:29.320
<v Speaker 2>in Vidia isn't Enron. In video itself has explained at

0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:32.159
<v Speaker 2>length as I'll explain by the way, it's not Enron.

0:06:32.240 --> 0:06:34.360
<v Speaker 2>And I'm not sure why you keep bringing up Enron

0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:37.320
<v Speaker 2>all the time. Stop being an asshole. Enron and in

0:06:37.440 --> 0:06:42.559
<v Speaker 2>Vidia are nothing alike. Look. Look, in Vidia's own memo

0:06:42.720 --> 0:06:45.560
<v Speaker 2>said that, and I quote in Nvidia does not resemble

0:06:45.680 --> 0:06:49.760
<v Speaker 2>historical accounting frauds because in Vidia's underlying business is economically sound,

0:06:49.920 --> 0:06:52.960
<v Speaker 2>its reporting is complete and transparent, and it cares about

0:06:53.000 --> 0:06:56.719
<v Speaker 2>its reputation for integrity. Now I know what you're thinking.

0:06:56.960 --> 0:06:59.360
<v Speaker 2>Why is the largest company on the stock market having

0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:02.520
<v Speaker 2>to reassure us about its underlying business economics and reporting.

0:07:02.800 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 2>One might immediately begin to think strives out effects style,

0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:09.320
<v Speaker 2>that there there might be something up with in Vidia's

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:13.440
<v Speaker 2>underlying business. But nevertheless, you know what, fuck it in Vidio,

0:07:13.560 --> 0:07:15.640
<v Speaker 2>grab your coat, we're going out. Let's forget how all

0:07:15.640 --> 0:07:17.720
<v Speaker 2>of this ever happened? What? What?

0:07:17.720 --> 0:07:18.040
<v Speaker 1>What was?

0:07:19.040 --> 0:07:20.080
<v Speaker 2>What was that first?

0:07:20.400 --> 0:07:23.280
<v Speaker 3>Unlike en Run, in Vidia does not use special purpose

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:26.600
<v Speaker 3>entities to hide debt and inflate revenue. In Vidia has

0:07:26.680 --> 0:07:29.960
<v Speaker 3>one guarantee for which the maximum exposure is disclosed in

0:07:30.040 --> 0:07:32.720
<v Speaker 3>Note nine of eight hundred and sixty million dollars and

0:07:32.840 --> 0:07:35.880
<v Speaker 3>is mitigated by four hundred and seventy million dollars in escrow.

0:07:36.240 --> 0:07:38.560
<v Speaker 3>The fair value of the guarantee is a crude and

0:07:38.640 --> 0:07:43.160
<v Speaker 3>disclosed as having an insignificant value. Nvidia neither controls nor

0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:46.000
<v Speaker 3>provides most of the financing for the companies in which

0:07:46.080 --> 0:07:47.200
<v Speaker 3>in Vidia invests.

0:07:48.000 --> 0:07:50.880
<v Speaker 2>Oh okay, I'm I wasn't really thinking about all that.

0:07:51.200 --> 0:07:53.760
<v Speaker 2>I was literally just I was just saying, how you

0:07:53.880 --> 0:07:57.000
<v Speaker 2>were nothing like Enron. We're good. Come on, let's let's go.

0:07:57.200 --> 0:07:58.120
<v Speaker 2>Let's the second.

0:07:58.400 --> 0:08:01.120
<v Speaker 3>The article claims that in Video Ever symbols WorldCom but

0:08:01.200 --> 0:08:05.200
<v Speaker 3>provides no support for the analogy WorldCom over stated earnings

0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:09.240
<v Speaker 3>by capitalizing operating expenses as capital expenditures. We are not

0:08:09.440 --> 0:08:14.080
<v Speaker 3>aware of any claims that Nvidia has improperly capitalized operating expenses.

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:18.840
<v Speaker 3>Several commentators alleged that customers have overstated earnings by extending

0:08:18.880 --> 0:08:24.160
<v Speaker 3>GPU depreciation schedules beyond economic useful life. Rebutting this claim,

0:08:24.360 --> 0:08:27.440
<v Speaker 3>some companies have increased useful life estimates to reflect the

0:08:27.480 --> 0:08:31.400
<v Speaker 3>fact that GPUs remain useful and profitable for longer than

0:08:31.400 --> 0:08:34.960
<v Speaker 3>originally anticipated, in many cases, for six years or more.

0:08:35.640 --> 0:08:39.400
<v Speaker 3>We provide additional context on the depreciation topic below.

0:08:41.880 --> 0:08:47.560
<v Speaker 2>Uh okay, I mean I wasn't even thinking about WorldCom.

0:08:48.000 --> 0:08:51.160
<v Speaker 2>I wasn't thinking about WorldCom at all. I genuinely hadn't

0:08:51.600 --> 0:08:54.559
<v Speaker 2>thought about WorldCom in a while. You're nothing, You're nothing

0:08:54.640 --> 0:08:58.800
<v Speaker 2>like them listeners for context. WorldCom was a telecommunications company

0:08:58.840 --> 0:09:01.079
<v Speaker 2>that collapsed in the early two thim in part because

0:09:01.080 --> 0:09:04.120
<v Speaker 2>it had a tendency of overstating its earnings by billions

0:09:04.120 --> 0:09:07.679
<v Speaker 2>and billions of dollars in total eleven billion dollars. This

0:09:07.760 --> 0:09:10.680
<v Speaker 2>followed a failed merger with Sprint, which was blocked for

0:09:10.720 --> 0:09:14.120
<v Speaker 2>antitrust reasons, essentially forcing the company to grow its stock

0:09:14.160 --> 0:09:18.320
<v Speaker 2>through customers rather than mergers. You know, normal way. Kind of,

0:09:18.920 --> 0:09:21.679
<v Speaker 2>the telecom sector was pretty saturated back there, making this

0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:23.520
<v Speaker 2>a pretty tall ask, and so we ended up with

0:09:23.520 --> 0:09:25.920
<v Speaker 2>a bunch of dodgy accounting, which all fell apart when

0:09:25.920 --> 0:09:31.440
<v Speaker 2>the company filed for bankruptcy. Hmmm, in video, you you're

0:09:31.480 --> 0:09:33.160
<v Speaker 2>not doing anything world commie, are you?

0:09:33.400 --> 0:09:45.520
<v Speaker 1>Why are you bringing up world Com?

0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:48.240
<v Speaker 2>To be clear, by the way, WelCom was doing capital

0:09:48.360 --> 0:09:51.240
<v Speaker 2>f fraud, and its CEO, Bernie Ebbers, went to prison

0:09:51.520 --> 0:09:54.480
<v Speaker 2>after an internal team of auditors led by WorldCom VP

0:09:54.640 --> 0:09:58.520
<v Speaker 2>of Eternal Auditing Cynthia Cooper, reported three point eight billion

0:09:58.559 --> 0:10:02.400
<v Speaker 2>dollars in misallocated expres says and phony accounting entries. That

0:10:02.600 --> 0:10:07.520
<v Speaker 2>is just straight up fraud. So okay, look, in Video,

0:10:08.760 --> 0:10:12.200
<v Speaker 2>you are really specific about saying you didn't capitalize operating expenses,

0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:17.000
<v Speaker 2>capital expenditures. You're not doing that. That's that's great, great stuff.

0:10:17.040 --> 0:10:21.600
<v Speaker 2>I literally never thought you'd done that before. I genuinely agree.

0:10:21.679 --> 0:10:25.680
<v Speaker 2>You have nothing like WELLcom in VideA, nothing like Wollcom anyway.

0:10:26.600 --> 0:10:29.199
<v Speaker 2>Glad to hear about the depreciation stuff. Looking forward to

0:10:29.240 --> 0:10:30.120
<v Speaker 2>hearing more about Bird.

0:10:30.440 --> 0:10:34.640
<v Speaker 3>Unlike Lucent, in Vidia does not rely on vendor financing

0:10:34.720 --> 0:10:39.240
<v Speaker 3>arrangements to grow revenue. In typical vendor financing arrangements, customers

0:10:39.240 --> 0:10:43.040
<v Speaker 3>pay for products over years. In Vidia's DSO was fifty

0:10:43.200 --> 0:10:47.120
<v Speaker 3>three in Q three. In Video discloses our standard payment terms,

0:10:47.120 --> 0:10:50.840
<v Speaker 3>with payment generally due shortly after delivery of products. We

0:10:50.960 --> 0:10:55.640
<v Speaker 3>do not disclose any vendor financing arrangements. Our customers are

0:10:55.679 --> 0:11:00.520
<v Speaker 3>subject to strict credit evaluation to ensure collectibility. In Video

0:11:00.640 --> 0:11:03.640
<v Speaker 3>would disclose any receivable longer than one year in long

0:11:03.760 --> 0:11:06.800
<v Speaker 3>term other assets. The six hundred and twenty three million.

0:11:07.040 --> 0:11:11.559
<v Speaker 3>Other balance as of Q three does not include extended receivables.

0:11:11.600 --> 0:11:14.880
<v Speaker 3>Even if it did, the amount would be immaterial to revenue.

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:23.280
<v Speaker 2>All right, Uh, all right, man. If anyone asks whether

0:11:23.320 --> 0:11:26.439
<v Speaker 2>you were like famed dot com crashout Loosen Technologies, I'll

0:11:26.480 --> 0:11:29.920
<v Speaker 2>be sure to correct them. Oh god, I'm gonna have

0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 2>to explain another business that failed around the millennium right now,

0:11:32.320 --> 0:11:36.160
<v Speaker 2>aren't I? After all, Loosent situation was really different, well

0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:41.160
<v Speaker 2>sort of. Loosen was a giant telecommunications company, the one

0:11:41.440 --> 0:11:45.160
<v Speaker 2>one that was for a time extremely successful, really really successful,

0:11:45.160 --> 0:11:48.960
<v Speaker 2>in fact, turned around by the now infamous Carli Fiorina. Furina,

0:11:49.000 --> 0:11:51.640
<v Speaker 2>who joined Loocent from AT and T, had a strong start,

0:11:51.800 --> 0:11:53.800
<v Speaker 2>and in her first few years at the company before

0:11:53.800 --> 0:11:56.679
<v Speaker 2>she left join the HP, Loosen saw revenues grow by

0:11:56.720 --> 0:11:59.360
<v Speaker 2>fifty eight percent to thirty eight billion dollars and their

0:11:59.440 --> 0:12:01.760
<v Speaker 2>income grow from a small loss to a four point

0:12:01.760 --> 0:12:06.040
<v Speaker 2>eight billion dollar profit. In video, this all sounds great.

0:12:06.240 --> 0:12:11.520
<v Speaker 2>Why wouldn't you want to be compared to Oh? Oh yeah, yeah, sorry,

0:12:12.080 --> 0:12:14.719
<v Speaker 2>you see. In nineteen ninety seven, Farina took over the

0:12:14.720 --> 0:12:17.640
<v Speaker 2>group responsible for selling geared to telecoms providers, and within

0:12:17.720 --> 0:12:21.440
<v Speaker 2>one year, that business unit grew by just shy of

0:12:21.520 --> 0:12:24.720
<v Speaker 2>a quarter. In two years, it had jumped from fifteen

0:12:24.760 --> 0:12:27.959
<v Speaker 2>point seven billion dollars when Furina took over to twenty

0:12:27.960 --> 0:12:31.040
<v Speaker 2>three point six billion dollars in nineteen ninety nine. Lucent

0:12:31.080 --> 0:12:33.439
<v Speaker 2>did this by lending money to its customers, with its

0:12:33.480 --> 0:12:36.920
<v Speaker 2>loans appearing on its balance sheets. As quoting CNN here

0:12:37.160 --> 0:12:42.680
<v Speaker 2>an allegedly sold assem now Lucient was classifying debt as

0:12:42.760 --> 0:12:46.040
<v Speaker 2>nasse and did something called vendor financing, which means you

0:12:46.120 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 2>lend somebody money to buy something from you. It turns

0:12:49.760 --> 0:12:53.040
<v Speaker 2>out Loosen did a lot of this, and in a

0:12:53.160 --> 0:12:55.560
<v Speaker 2>very simple way. This is like giving someone a ten

0:12:55.600 --> 0:12:57.840
<v Speaker 2>dollar loan to buy ten dollars of bricks from you.

0:12:58.080 --> 0:13:01.720
<v Speaker 2>It's just handing the same ten dollars back and no

0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:06.720
<v Speaker 2>one's really doing well here. Look. These loans were also

0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:11.560
<v Speaker 2>very generous with Telco's small fledgling telecommunications companies with minimal

0:13:11.559 --> 0:13:14.000
<v Speaker 2>assets and revenue by the way, and often mountains of

0:13:14.040 --> 0:13:17.640
<v Speaker 2>high interest. They're often paying nothing up from the loans

0:13:17.679 --> 0:13:20.079
<v Speaker 2>themselves were often bigger than the company itself and far

0:13:20.120 --> 0:13:22.959
<v Speaker 2>beyond what the company could hope to repay. Okay and

0:13:23.080 --> 0:13:26.160
<v Speaker 2>Video look we're we're friends.

0:13:26.240 --> 0:13:26.480
<v Speaker 1>Okay.

0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:29.400
<v Speaker 2>I hate to say this, but I kind of get

0:13:29.400 --> 0:13:31.920
<v Speaker 2>why somebody might say you're doing loos and stuff. After all,

0:13:31.960 --> 0:13:34.600
<v Speaker 2>Rumor has it that in your supposed to deal with

0:13:34.640 --> 0:13:37.080
<v Speaker 2>open AI, a company that burns billions of dollars a year,

0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:42.080
<v Speaker 2>will maybe involve leasing your GPUs to them, which sure

0:13:42.200 --> 0:13:44.079
<v Speaker 2>sounds like you're doing vendor finance.

0:13:44.200 --> 0:13:47.800
<v Speaker 3>We do not disclose any vendor financing arrangements.

0:13:48.280 --> 0:13:54.360
<v Speaker 2>Oh all right, Okay, you're not disclosing any vendor financing arrangements. Okay,

0:13:54.400 --> 0:13:55.760
<v Speaker 2>I I got it.

0:13:55.800 --> 0:13:56.000
<v Speaker 1>Man.

0:13:57.320 --> 0:14:00.400
<v Speaker 2>Anyway, back to Loosen. Loosen really did fuck up big time, though,

0:14:00.400 --> 0:14:02.959
<v Speaker 2>indulging in the dark art of circular vendor financing, the

0:14:03.040 --> 0:14:06.160
<v Speaker 2>legs of which and VIDIA has not kind of. In

0:14:06.240 --> 0:14:08.920
<v Speaker 2>ninety ninety eight, signed its largest deal, a two billion

0:14:08.960 --> 0:14:13.439
<v Speaker 2>dollar deal, an equipment and finance agreement with telecommunications company Windstar,

0:14:13.480 --> 0:14:16.199
<v Speaker 2>which promised to bring I shit you not, one hundred

0:14:16.240 --> 0:14:18.480
<v Speaker 2>billion dollars in new business over the next five years

0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:21.640
<v Speaker 2>and built a giant wireless broadband network along with expanding

0:14:21.680 --> 0:14:26.800
<v Speaker 2>Windstar's optical networking I quote the Wall Street Journal. Windstar

0:14:26.920 --> 0:14:29.640
<v Speaker 2>was one of the scores of standalone startup companies created

0:14:29.640 --> 0:14:31.720
<v Speaker 2>in the late nineteen nineties to compete in the market

0:14:31.720 --> 0:14:35.080
<v Speaker 2>for local telecom services. These firms, known as competitive Local

0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:39.240
<v Speaker 2>Exchange Carriers or clacs, raised billions of dollars in debt

0:14:39.280 --> 0:14:42.360
<v Speaker 2>and equity financing and embarked upon ambitious plans to compete

0:14:42.360 --> 0:14:45.520
<v Speaker 2>with incumbent carriers. For a time in the late nineties,

0:14:45.760 --> 0:14:49.360
<v Speaker 2>their stocks were hot properties, outpacing even Internet stocks. In

0:14:49.400 --> 0:14:52.320
<v Speaker 2>December ninety ninety nine, Wyatt would say that Windstar's small

0:14:52.360 --> 0:14:56.040
<v Speaker 2>white dish antennas heralded a new era and new mindset

0:14:56.040 --> 0:15:00.200
<v Speaker 2>in telecommunications and included this awesome quote about Loosen from

0:15:00.280 --> 0:15:04.200
<v Speaker 2>CEO and founder Will Ruhanna. On one level, we're a

0:15:04.240 --> 0:15:06.960
<v Speaker 2>customer and they are a supplier. On another level, they're

0:15:07.000 --> 0:15:10.280
<v Speaker 2>a financier and we are a borrower. On yet another level,

0:15:10.440 --> 0:15:13.800
<v Speaker 2>they are providing services around the world to accelerate our development.

0:15:13.960 --> 0:15:16.080
<v Speaker 2>They also want to use our service and have guaranteed

0:15:16.120 --> 0:15:20.360
<v Speaker 2>one hundred million dollars in business. Hell yeah, I also

0:15:20.440 --> 0:15:23.320
<v Speaker 2>love this because you can read this or hear this

0:15:23.440 --> 0:15:26.040
<v Speaker 2>or what have you, and go and read current magazines

0:15:26.080 --> 0:15:28.640
<v Speaker 2>talking about these companies and see them do the same things.

0:15:29.240 --> 0:15:33.800
<v Speaker 2>Just look, Oh my god, there is actually another great

0:15:33.840 --> 0:15:37.320
<v Speaker 2>coat I might want to share with you. Windstar is

0:15:37.320 --> 0:15:39.760
<v Speaker 2>a publicly traded company and has more than four thousand

0:15:39.800 --> 0:15:42.320
<v Speaker 2>employees and reports more than three hundred million dollars in

0:15:42.360 --> 0:15:46.600
<v Speaker 2>annual highed coore revenues. We love annualized revenues, double, folks,

0:15:46.840 --> 0:15:49.320
<v Speaker 2>we love them. Just do month times to where you

0:15:49.360 --> 0:15:51.840
<v Speaker 2>get the biggest numbers we've ever seen. They're beautiful.

0:15:51.880 --> 0:15:54.520
<v Speaker 1>We love them.

0:15:54.640 --> 0:15:57.480
<v Speaker 2>A company making about twenty five million dollars a month

0:15:59.120 --> 0:16:02.080
<v Speaker 2>twenty five million dollars a month in revenue signed a

0:16:02.080 --> 0:16:07.520
<v Speaker 2>two billion dollar loan two billion dollars in financing for

0:16:07.720 --> 0:16:11.720
<v Speaker 2>business that would make them one hundred million dollars ass

0:16:11.760 --> 0:16:14.760
<v Speaker 2>across five years. They aren't teaching this in business school,

0:16:14.840 --> 0:16:18.400
<v Speaker 2>do they? Weirdly, Winstar's Wikipedia page says that revenues were

0:16:18.400 --> 0:16:20.520
<v Speaker 2>four hundred and forty five point six million dollars for

0:16:20.520 --> 0:16:23.640
<v Speaker 2>the year ending nineteen ninety nine, or around thirty seven

0:16:23.680 --> 0:16:26.760
<v Speaker 2>point one million dollars a month. These numbers don't line

0:16:26.840 --> 0:16:31.480
<v Speaker 2>up so good, and probably because Windstar was kind of crooked. Now, WinStar,

0:16:31.600 --> 0:16:35.640
<v Speaker 2>they loved raising money. Two years later, in November two thousand,

0:16:35.800 --> 0:16:38.320
<v Speaker 2>it would raise one point oh two billion dollars for example,

0:16:38.400 --> 0:16:40.920
<v Speaker 2>and it raised the remarkable five point six billion dollars

0:16:40.960 --> 0:16:43.680
<v Speaker 2>between February ninety ninety nine and July two thousand and one.

0:16:43.760 --> 0:16:46.720
<v Speaker 2>According to The Wall Street Journal, nine hundred million dollars

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:48.840
<v Speaker 2>of that came in December nineteen ninety nine for an

0:16:48.880 --> 0:16:52.440
<v Speaker 2>investment from a bunch of investors, including, of course, Microsoft,

0:16:52.600 --> 0:16:55.720
<v Speaker 2>with analyst Greg Miller of Jeffreys and Co. Saying the

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:59.160
<v Speaker 2>Microsoft investment is a significant endorsement that the technology will

0:16:59.160 --> 0:17:02.200
<v Speaker 2>be used more aggressive in the future. Windstar can use

0:17:02.240 --> 0:17:05.360
<v Speaker 2>the capital. They sure fucking can, can't they?

0:17:05.960 --> 0:17:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Now?

0:17:06.240 --> 0:17:08.880
<v Speaker 2>Another fun thing happened In November two thousand and two,

0:17:09.280 --> 0:17:12.359
<v Speaker 2>Lucent would admit it overstated its fourth quarter profits by

0:17:12.400 --> 0:17:15.320
<v Speaker 2>improperly recording one hundred and twenty five million dollars in sales,

0:17:15.400 --> 0:17:18.160
<v Speaker 2>reducing that quarter as revenue from profitable to break even.

0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:22.000
<v Speaker 2>Things would eventually collapse when Windstar couldn't pay its debts,

0:17:22.160 --> 0:17:25.920
<v Speaker 2>filing for Chapter eleven bankruptcy protection on April eighteenth, two

0:17:25.920 --> 0:17:28.639
<v Speaker 2>thousand and one, after failing to pay seventy five million

0:17:28.640 --> 0:17:31.320
<v Speaker 2>dollars in interest payments to Loosen, which had cut access

0:17:31.359 --> 0:17:33.720
<v Speaker 2>to the remaining four hundred dollars million dollars not four

0:17:33.800 --> 0:17:36.440
<v Speaker 2>hundred dollars four hundred million dollars of its one billion

0:17:36.480 --> 0:17:40.200
<v Speaker 2>dollar loan to Windstar. As a result, Windstar would file

0:17:40.240 --> 0:17:42.399
<v Speaker 2>a ten billion dollar law soon in bankruptcy court in

0:17:42.440 --> 0:17:45.520
<v Speaker 2>Delaware the very same day, claiming that Lucent breached its

0:17:45.520 --> 0:17:49.320
<v Speaker 2>contract and forced Windstar into bankruptcy by well not offering

0:17:49.320 --> 0:17:53.280
<v Speaker 2>to give it more money that it would not pay off. Elsewhere,

0:17:53.320 --> 0:17:56.040
<v Speaker 2>things had begun to unravel for Loosened. A January two

0:17:56.040 --> 0:17:57.960
<v Speaker 2>thousand and one story from The New York Times stopped

0:17:57.960 --> 0:18:00.000
<v Speaker 2>the strange story of Lucent, a company that made up

0:18:00.000 --> 0:18:02.199
<v Speaker 2>over thirty three billion dollars in revenue in its previous

0:18:02.200 --> 0:18:05.120
<v Speaker 2>fiscal year, asking to defer the final trance of payment

0:18:05.560 --> 0:18:08.439
<v Speaker 2>twenty million dollars for an acquisition due to and I

0:18:08.520 --> 0:18:13.040
<v Speaker 2>quote accounting and financial reporting considerations. Now why would they

0:18:13.080 --> 0:18:17.040
<v Speaker 2>do that? Well, Lucent needed to keep that money on

0:18:17.080 --> 0:18:18.960
<v Speaker 2>the books to boost its earnings as its stock was

0:18:19.000 --> 0:18:21.000
<v Speaker 2>in the toilet and was about to announce it was

0:18:21.040 --> 0:18:23.439
<v Speaker 2>laying off ten thousand people and a quarterly loss of

0:18:23.520 --> 0:18:26.440
<v Speaker 2>over a billion dollars. Over the course of the next

0:18:26.440 --> 0:18:28.879
<v Speaker 2>few years, Lusent would sell off various entities, and by

0:18:28.880 --> 0:18:31.160
<v Speaker 2>the end of September two thousand and five, it would

0:18:31.200 --> 0:18:33.920
<v Speaker 2>have thirty thousand, five hundred staff and a stock price

0:18:33.960 --> 0:18:36.119
<v Speaker 2>of two dollars in ninety nine cents, down from a

0:18:36.160 --> 0:18:37.959
<v Speaker 2>high of seventy five bucks a share at the edge

0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:40.080
<v Speaker 2>of nineteen ninety nine and one hundred and fifty seven

0:18:40.119 --> 0:18:45.240
<v Speaker 2>thousand employees. According to VC Thomas Tunger's and that is

0:18:45.280 --> 0:18:47.879
<v Speaker 2>his name, Luson had eight point one billion dollars of

0:18:47.960 --> 0:18:51.439
<v Speaker 2>vendor financing deals. At its high, Lusent was still a

0:18:51.440 --> 0:18:54.560
<v Speaker 2>real company selling real things, but it had massively over

0:18:54.600 --> 0:18:57.200
<v Speaker 2>extended itself in an attempt to meet demand that didn't

0:18:57.200 --> 0:19:00.080
<v Speaker 2>really exist. And when Lucent realized that it was, how

0:19:00.119 --> 0:19:02.880
<v Speaker 2>did Degree demand itself to please the markets? To quote

0:19:02.960 --> 0:19:06.199
<v Speaker 2>MIT Tech review and author Lisa Endlich, it believed that

0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:09.160
<v Speaker 2>setting and meeting the expectations of Wall Street subsumed all

0:19:09.160 --> 0:19:11.639
<v Speaker 2>other goals, and that Lucent had little choice but to

0:19:11.720 --> 0:19:15.760
<v Speaker 2>ride the wave. To be clear, in Vidia is quite

0:19:15.800 --> 0:19:18.240
<v Speaker 2>different from Lusam. He has plenty of money in the

0:19:18.240 --> 0:19:20.800
<v Speaker 2>circular deals it does with Corweve and Lambda don't involve

0:19:20.880 --> 0:19:23.439
<v Speaker 2>the same levels of risk. In Vidia is not, to

0:19:23.560 --> 0:19:27.080
<v Speaker 2>my knowledge, backstopping Corwy's business or providing it with loans.

0:19:27.119 --> 0:19:29.920
<v Speaker 2>Though in Vidia had agreed to buy six point three

0:19:29.960 --> 0:19:32.240
<v Speaker 2>billion dollars of computers the buyer of last resort of

0:19:32.320 --> 0:19:36.520
<v Speaker 2>any unsold capacity, and did mention an unnamed partner it

0:19:36.560 --> 0:19:39.600
<v Speaker 2>had agreed to backstop the leases of in its most

0:19:39.600 --> 0:19:43.960
<v Speaker 2>recent earnings. Nevertheless, Nvidia can afford this, and it isn't illegal.

0:19:44.040 --> 0:19:47.040
<v Speaker 2>Though it is obviously propping up a company with flagging demand.

0:19:47.640 --> 0:19:50.240
<v Speaker 2>Nvidia doesn't appear to be taking on masses of debt

0:19:50.240 --> 0:19:52.919
<v Speaker 2>to find its empire either, with other fifty six billion

0:19:52.920 --> 0:19:55.840
<v Speaker 2>dollars in cash on hand and a mere eight point

0:19:55.880 --> 0:20:00.560
<v Speaker 2>four billion dollars in long term debt. Okay, we got there.

0:20:00.640 --> 0:20:03.480
<v Speaker 2>This man and video is nothing like Loosen either. Okay,

0:20:03.840 --> 0:20:06.560
<v Speaker 2>maybe there are some similarities, but it's different. No worries

0:20:06.560 --> 0:20:09.240
<v Speaker 2>at all. I know I'm chill, I'm relaxed, and I'm

0:20:09.280 --> 0:20:13.960
<v Speaker 2>most importantly normal. You still seem nervous in video. I

0:20:14.320 --> 0:20:17.080
<v Speaker 2>promise you. If anyone asks me if you're like Loosen,

0:20:17.200 --> 0:20:19.040
<v Speaker 2>I'll tell him you're not. I'll be sure to tell

0:20:19.080 --> 0:20:21.560
<v Speaker 2>him You're nothing like Lucien. Are you okay?

0:20:21.640 --> 0:20:21.920
<v Speaker 1>Dude?

0:20:21.960 --> 0:20:22.680
<v Speaker 2>When did you last?

0:20:22.720 --> 0:20:23.240
<v Speaker 1>Slow? Okay?

0:20:23.520 --> 0:20:28.840
<v Speaker 3>So about inventory growth indicating waning demand, People are claiming

0:20:28.880 --> 0:20:32.399
<v Speaker 3>that growing inventory in Q three, which was above thirty

0:20:32.440 --> 0:20:35.960
<v Speaker 3>two percent quarter over quarter, suggests that demand is weak

0:20:36.080 --> 0:20:40.280
<v Speaker 3>and chips are accumulating unsold or customers are accepting delivery

0:20:40.320 --> 0:20:45.000
<v Speaker 3>without payment capability, causing inventory to convert to receivables rather

0:20:45.080 --> 0:20:46.240
<v Speaker 3>than cash.

0:20:46.280 --> 0:20:51.439
<v Speaker 2>Whoa, whoa, Okay, slow down, slow down? Who's been saying this?

0:20:51.720 --> 0:20:52.200
<v Speaker 1>Oh?

0:20:52.240 --> 0:20:55.159
<v Speaker 2>Everybody? Did Michael Burry scare you? Did you watch the

0:20:55.160 --> 0:20:55.720
<v Speaker 2>Big Shorts?

0:20:55.720 --> 0:20:55.880
<v Speaker 1>Say?

0:20:55.920 --> 0:21:00.280
<v Speaker 2>Ah, Christian Bale's playing Pantera again? Eh? Anyway, how you've

0:21:00.280 --> 0:21:02.239
<v Speaker 2>woken up everybody else in the house and they're all

0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:06.040
<v Speaker 2>wondering why you're talking about receivables. Shouldn't that be fine?

0:21:06.359 --> 0:21:08.879
<v Speaker 2>In video is a big business. Your business is pretty big, man,

0:21:08.920 --> 0:21:11.399
<v Speaker 2>And it's totally reasonable to believe that a company planning

0:21:11.400 --> 0:21:13.679
<v Speaker 2>to sell sixty three billion dollars of GPUs in the

0:21:13.680 --> 0:21:17.240
<v Speaker 2>next quarter would have ballooning receivables thirty three billion dollars

0:21:17.280 --> 0:21:20.000
<v Speaker 2>in receivables up from twenty seven billion dollars last quarter.

0:21:20.200 --> 0:21:23.760
<v Speaker 2>A growing inventory nineteen point seven eight billion dollars up

0:21:23.760 --> 0:21:26.520
<v Speaker 2>from fourteen point nine six billion dollars in the last quarter.

0:21:26.640 --> 0:21:31.480
<v Speaker 2>That is that is pretty big up. But nevertheless, in

0:21:31.600 --> 0:21:34.439
<v Speaker 2>video's a big asset, heavy business, which means in videos,

0:21:34.480 --> 0:21:37.520
<v Speaker 2>clients likely get decent payment terms to raise their or

0:21:37.560 --> 0:21:41.360
<v Speaker 2>move cash around to get them paid. Okay, everyone, calm down.

0:21:41.440 --> 0:21:43.680
<v Speaker 2>You can go back to bed like my buddy, who

0:21:43.720 --> 0:21:46.080
<v Speaker 2>is nothing like Enron by the way, just said.

0:21:46.440 --> 0:21:50.639
<v Speaker 3>First, growing inventory does not necessarily indicate weak demand. In

0:21:50.640 --> 0:21:54.760
<v Speaker 3>addition to finished goods, inventory includes significant raw materials in

0:21:54.840 --> 0:21:59.520
<v Speaker 3>work in progress. Companies with sophisticated supply chains typically build

0:21:59.520 --> 0:22:03.080
<v Speaker 3>inventory in advance of new product launches to avoid stockouts.

0:22:03.520 --> 0:22:07.360
<v Speaker 3>In Video's current supply levels are consistent with historical trends

0:22:07.400 --> 0:22:11.919
<v Speaker 3>and anticipate strong future growth. Second, growing inventory does not

0:22:12.000 --> 0:22:16.119
<v Speaker 3>indicate customers are accepting delivery without payment. Capability in video

0:22:16.160 --> 0:22:21.040
<v Speaker 3>recognizes revenue upon shipping a product and deeming collectibility probable.

0:22:21.440 --> 0:22:25.080
<v Speaker 3>The shipping reduces inventory, which is not related to customer payments.

0:22:25.320 --> 0:22:30.280
<v Speaker 3>Our customers are subject to strict credit evaluation to ensure collectibility.

0:22:30.760 --> 0:22:35.040
<v Speaker 3>Payment is due shortly after product delivery. Some customers prepay

0:22:35.520 --> 0:22:39.400
<v Speaker 3>in videos. Dso actually decreased sequentially from fifty four days

0:22:39.400 --> 0:22:40.480
<v Speaker 3>to fifty three days.

0:22:43.280 --> 0:22:47.120
<v Speaker 2>Nice dude, You're totally right. It's pretty common for companies,

0:22:47.200 --> 0:22:51.160
<v Speaker 2>especially large ones, to deliver something before they receive cash

0:22:51.160 --> 0:22:54.639
<v Speaker 2>and it happens. I'm being sincere. Sounds like companies are

0:22:54.640 --> 0:22:57.639
<v Speaker 2>paying great, but you know, can you just be just

0:22:57.760 --> 0:23:01.120
<v Speaker 2>a little more specific, like the whole shipping things before

0:23:01.160 --> 0:23:01.920
<v Speaker 2>they're paid things.

0:23:02.000 --> 0:23:06.720
<v Speaker 3>Video recognizes revenue upon shipping a product and deeming collectibility probable.

0:23:07.200 --> 0:23:09.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, okay, I thought I heard you out the first time.

0:23:09.720 --> 0:23:13.359
<v Speaker 2>What does deeming collectibility probable mean? You could have just

0:23:13.359 --> 0:23:16.399
<v Speaker 2>said we get paid like ninety five percent of the

0:23:16.400 --> 0:23:19.240
<v Speaker 2>time within two months or whatever, unless it's not like

0:23:19.359 --> 0:23:23.280
<v Speaker 2>ninety five or ninety percent. How often? How often are

0:23:23.359 --> 0:23:26.399
<v Speaker 2>you paid within two months? Most companies don't break this down,

0:23:26.440 --> 0:23:28.080
<v Speaker 2>by the way, But then again, most companies are not

0:23:28.080 --> 0:23:30.399
<v Speaker 2>in Video the largest company on the stock market. If

0:23:30.440 --> 0:23:32.720
<v Speaker 2>I'm honest, nobody else has recently had to put anything

0:23:32.720 --> 0:23:35.760
<v Speaker 2>out that says I'm not Enron, And I want to

0:23:35.760 --> 0:23:40.520
<v Speaker 2>be clear that in Vidia is not like Enron for real,

0:23:40.600 --> 0:23:45.000
<v Speaker 2>though it really isn't like Enron, and jokes aside, bits aside,

0:23:45.560 --> 0:23:49.119
<v Speaker 2>there were very different businesses. They were very different. Indeed,

0:23:49.520 --> 0:23:52.200
<v Speaker 2>is it is very strange though that in Video wants

0:23:52.240 --> 0:23:54.919
<v Speaker 2>somebody to think about how it's nothing like Enron. This

0:23:55.080 --> 0:23:57.199
<v Speaker 2>was technically an internal memo, and thus there is a

0:23:57.359 --> 0:24:01.479
<v Speaker 2>chance its existence was built for only nvidians or short

0:24:01.480 --> 0:24:04.720
<v Speaker 2>sellers or something worried about the value of the stock.

0:24:05.000 --> 0:24:07.080
<v Speaker 2>And we know it's definitely written to try and deflect

0:24:07.080 --> 0:24:11.520
<v Speaker 2>Michael Burry's criticism, as well as a random AI slap substacker.

0:24:14.720 --> 0:24:19.440
<v Speaker 2>It's just weird. It's weird. I don't really know what's

0:24:19.480 --> 0:24:21.679
<v Speaker 2>going on, and I really want to know. Why does

0:24:21.760 --> 0:24:23.840
<v Speaker 2>nvidio need you to know? It's nothing like Enron did

0:24:24.280 --> 0:24:26.920
<v Speaker 2>do something like Enron? Is there a chance that you

0:24:27.080 --> 0:24:31.679
<v Speaker 2>or I may mistakenly say, hey, is in Vidio doing Enron?

0:24:47.119 --> 0:24:49.760
<v Speaker 1>Hey in video? How are you feeling? Yeah?

0:24:49.920 --> 0:24:51.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you had a rough night. You were saying all

0:24:51.640 --> 0:24:54.679
<v Speaker 2>this crazy stuff about Enron. Are you doing okay? No, No,

0:24:54.760 --> 0:24:57.720
<v Speaker 2>I get it. You're nothing like Enron. You said a

0:24:57.760 --> 0:25:00.600
<v Speaker 2>lot of that last night. So why you were sleeping? Yeah,

0:25:00.640 --> 0:25:02.720
<v Speaker 2>you've been asleep sixteen hours. By the way, you were

0:25:02.720 --> 0:25:05.800
<v Speaker 2>pretty messed up. You brought up loosent than puked in

0:25:05.880 --> 0:25:09.199
<v Speaker 2>my sink and tried to scream at my cat. I

0:25:09.280 --> 0:25:11.120
<v Speaker 2>did some digging though, and like, I get it, You're

0:25:11.160 --> 0:25:13.520
<v Speaker 2>nothing like Enron. Enron was breaking the law in video

0:25:13.640 --> 0:25:17.120
<v Speaker 2>is definitely not doing that. But you said you didn't

0:25:17.200 --> 0:25:21.240
<v Speaker 2>use special purpose vehicles recently you did though you are,

0:25:21.720 --> 0:25:24.880
<v Speaker 2>You're not using them like Enron. Enron moved the debt

0:25:24.920 --> 0:25:28.280
<v Speaker 2>around on the SPVs. But you're investing two billion dollars

0:25:28.320 --> 0:25:30.840
<v Speaker 2>in in Elon Musks special purpose vehicle that will then

0:25:30.920 --> 0:25:33.800
<v Speaker 2>use that money to raise debt to buy GPUs from you,

0:25:34.280 --> 0:25:37.119
<v Speaker 2>from you and video that would then be rented to

0:25:37.280 --> 0:25:41.520
<v Speaker 2>Elon Musk. And this is very different to what Enron did.

0:25:41.600 --> 0:25:43.760
<v Speaker 2>I am with you, dude. Don't let the haters keep

0:25:43.800 --> 0:25:46.800
<v Speaker 2>you down. No, I I don't think a T shirt

0:25:46.800 --> 0:25:48.520
<v Speaker 2>that says in video is not like Enron for these

0:25:48.560 --> 0:25:51.480
<v Speaker 2>specific reasons will help you either. Wait wait, okay, look

0:25:52.480 --> 0:25:55.679
<v Speaker 2>one thing, though, you have this theoretical deal lined up

0:25:55.680 --> 0:25:58.240
<v Speaker 2>with Sam Mortman to invest one hundred billion dollars in

0:25:58.240 --> 0:25:59.919
<v Speaker 2>the open AI. And yes, you said in your latest

0:26:00.280 --> 0:26:01.919
<v Speaker 2>that it was actually a letter of intent with the

0:26:01.920 --> 0:26:05.159
<v Speaker 2>opportunity to invest, which doesn't mean anything, got it. And

0:26:05.200 --> 0:26:07.560
<v Speaker 2>the plan was you would lease the GPU's two open

0:26:07.600 --> 0:26:12.359
<v Speaker 2>AI if the deal happens. Now, theoretically, how would you

0:26:12.440 --> 0:26:14.320
<v Speaker 2>go about doing that in video? You'd probably need to

0:26:14.320 --> 0:26:16.720
<v Speaker 2>do exactly the same deal you did with Xai. You

0:26:16.800 --> 0:26:20.360
<v Speaker 2>would you would buy the GPUs from yourself and then

0:26:20.640 --> 0:26:25.199
<v Speaker 2>rent them to open Ai. That's that's a little loosened

0:26:25.240 --> 0:26:30.440
<v Speaker 2>to you. Kind of sounds like vendor financing. And oh

0:26:30.480 --> 0:26:31.840
<v Speaker 2>you mentioned that rook man.

0:26:32.160 --> 0:26:35.760
<v Speaker 3>Unlike Lucent, in Vidia does not rely on vendor financing

0:26:35.840 --> 0:26:40.320
<v Speaker 3>arrangements to grow revenue. In typical vendor financing arrangements, customers

0:26:40.359 --> 0:26:44.199
<v Speaker 3>pay for products over years. In Vidio's DSO was fifty

0:26:44.200 --> 0:26:48.119
<v Speaker 3>three and Q three. In Vidia discloses our standard payment terms,

0:26:48.160 --> 0:26:51.199
<v Speaker 3>with payment generally due shortly after delivery of products. We

0:26:51.280 --> 0:26:54.680
<v Speaker 3>do not disclose any vendor financing arrangement. Let me stop

0:26:54.680 --> 0:26:56.919
<v Speaker 3>you right there. Let me stop you right there for

0:26:56.960 --> 0:27:00.320
<v Speaker 3>a second. You were on about this last night, and

0:27:00.359 --> 0:27:02.560
<v Speaker 3>you scared my cats from you're crying about something called

0:27:02.760 --> 0:27:06.040
<v Speaker 3>two nanimeter. I don't know. First of all, why are

0:27:06.119 --> 0:27:10.080
<v Speaker 3>you bringing up specifically typical vendor financing agreements? Do you

0:27:10.080 --> 0:27:15.280
<v Speaker 3>have atypical ones? Also, I'm jazzed. I guess i'd say

0:27:15.320 --> 0:27:19.439
<v Speaker 3>to hear you disclose your standard payment terms. But what

0:27:19.720 --> 0:27:22.760
<v Speaker 3>standard payment terms? What exactly where can I find those?

0:27:22.800 --> 0:27:25.080
<v Speaker 3>By the way, because you didn't link them, you didn't

0:27:25.640 --> 0:27:26.560
<v Speaker 3>didn't mention them.

0:27:26.600 --> 0:27:30.600
<v Speaker 2>Where are those. And also, look you're saying the words

0:27:30.680 --> 0:27:33.800
<v Speaker 2>you don't disclose any vendor financing arrangements. Those are the

0:27:33.840 --> 0:27:37.240
<v Speaker 2>exact words, though those words are very different to I

0:27:37.359 --> 0:27:40.080
<v Speaker 2>do not have any We do not have any vendor

0:27:40.160 --> 0:27:43.240
<v Speaker 2>financing arrangement. I do not disclose when I go to

0:27:43.280 --> 0:27:47.080
<v Speaker 2>the bathroom, but I absolutely do use the toilet. Let's

0:27:47.080 --> 0:27:49.439
<v Speaker 2>not pretend that Nvidio doesn't have a history in helping

0:27:49.840 --> 0:27:53.679
<v Speaker 2>getting its business buddies funding and Video has deals with

0:27:53.680 --> 0:27:56.000
<v Speaker 2>both Lambda and Core weave to guarantee that they will

0:27:56.119 --> 0:27:59.160
<v Speaker 2>have compute revenue, which they in turn used to raise debt,

0:27:59.160 --> 0:28:01.720
<v Speaker 2>which is then used to buy more in Vidio GPUs,

0:28:02.600 --> 0:28:05.359
<v Speaker 2>you've learned how to feed the day into yourself in video.

0:28:05.440 --> 0:28:08.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm genuinely impressed. This is great stuff. I'm having the

0:28:08.520 --> 0:28:11.160
<v Speaker 2>time of my life with how not like Enron you are.

0:28:11.320 --> 0:28:13.760
<v Speaker 2>And I'm serious that I one hundred percent do not

0:28:13.840 --> 0:28:18.320
<v Speaker 2>believe you are like Enron. But what exactly you doing?

0:28:18.440 --> 0:28:18.840
<v Speaker 1>Man?

0:28:19.720 --> 0:28:22.920
<v Speaker 2>What do you what are you doing to get Wall

0:28:22.960 --> 0:28:29.720
<v Speaker 2>Street what it wants? I'm serious though, seriously, folks, and

0:28:30.000 --> 0:28:33.880
<v Speaker 2>thank you Ben for being in Vidia there in video

0:28:34.000 --> 0:28:37.239
<v Speaker 2>really isn't like Enron, though, it really isn't. And I

0:28:37.280 --> 0:28:39.440
<v Speaker 2>hear a lot of people saying things like, even about

0:28:39.440 --> 0:28:41.640
<v Speaker 2>Sam Morman, I wanted this is a brief rent here

0:28:42.320 --> 0:28:44.200
<v Speaker 2>saying people are going to go to jail. People are

0:28:44.240 --> 0:28:46.240
<v Speaker 2>going to go to prison. There's fraud. There's fraud here,

0:28:46.320 --> 0:28:48.280
<v Speaker 2>Core Weave's doing fraud, this, that and the other. None

0:28:48.320 --> 0:28:50.880
<v Speaker 2>of these companies are doing fraud. That's the world we

0:28:50.920 --> 0:28:54.360
<v Speaker 2>live in. They are doing accountancy, alchemy, They're moving stuff around,

0:28:54.400 --> 0:28:57.600
<v Speaker 2>they are There are ways that in Vidia could be

0:28:57.640 --> 0:29:00.280
<v Speaker 2>doing all of this, and I'm very sure that the

0:29:00.320 --> 0:29:03.480
<v Speaker 2>case perfectly legally. Sam Orban not breaking the law either,

0:29:03.840 --> 0:29:08.320
<v Speaker 2>assuming he's been honest with his investors. Nevertheless, for real, though,

0:29:08.760 --> 0:29:12.400
<v Speaker 2>Invidia is nothing like Enron. Enron was a criminal enterprise,

0:29:12.440 --> 0:29:14.760
<v Speaker 2>and Nvidia is not. More than likely in video is

0:29:14.800 --> 0:29:17.600
<v Speaker 2>doing relatively boring vendor financing stuff and getting people to

0:29:17.600 --> 0:29:20.480
<v Speaker 2>pay them on fifty to sixty day time scales, probably

0:29:20.520 --> 0:29:23.040
<v Speaker 2>net sixty and like it said, it gets paid up

0:29:23.040 --> 0:29:29.040
<v Speaker 2>front sometimes. In Video truly isn't like Enron. After all, Meta,

0:29:29.200 --> 0:29:31.880
<v Speaker 2>Microsoft and Apple are the ones getting into energy trading.

0:29:32.440 --> 0:29:34.600
<v Speaker 2>To the point that I actually think it's time that

0:29:34.640 --> 0:29:37.920
<v Speaker 2>someone explained what exactly happened to Enron with a more

0:29:37.920 --> 0:29:41.320
<v Speaker 2>modern twist, or at least as much as it's possible

0:29:41.360 --> 0:29:44.800
<v Speaker 2>within the confines of a podcast that isn't exclusively about Enron.

0:29:45.280 --> 0:29:47.480
<v Speaker 2>But I'm going to explain next episode what the fuck

0:29:47.600 --> 0:29:50.560
<v Speaker 2>Enron was and you can have some fun listening to it.

0:29:59.040 --> 0:30:00.720
<v Speaker 2>Thank you for listening to Better Offline.

0:30:00.840 --> 0:30:03.280
<v Speaker 4>The editor and composer of the Better Offline theme song

0:30:03.360 --> 0:30:06.000
<v Speaker 4>is Matasowski. You can check out more of his music

0:30:06.040 --> 0:30:09.680
<v Speaker 4>and audio projects at Matasowski dot com, M A T

0:30:09.680 --> 0:30:14.160
<v Speaker 4>T O S O W s ki dot com. You

0:30:14.160 --> 0:30:16.680
<v Speaker 4>can email me at easy at Better Offline dot com,

0:30:16.760 --> 0:30:19.080
<v Speaker 4>or visit better Offline dot com to find more podcast

0:30:19.120 --> 0:30:22.440
<v Speaker 4>links and of course my newsletter. I also really recommend

0:30:22.480 --> 0:30:24.440
<v Speaker 4>you go to chat dot where's youreaed dot at to

0:30:24.520 --> 0:30:27.320
<v Speaker 4>visit the discord, and go to our slash Better Offline

0:30:27.360 --> 0:30:28.440
<v Speaker 4>to check out our reddit.

0:30:29.200 --> 0:30:32.480
<v Speaker 2>Thank you so much for listening. Better Offline is a

0:30:32.480 --> 0:30:35.360
<v Speaker 2>production of cool Zone Media. For more from cool Zone Media,

0:30:35.720 --> 0:30:38.840
<v Speaker 2>visit our website cool Zonemedia dot com, or check us

0:30:38.840 --> 0:30:41.840
<v Speaker 2>out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

0:30:41.880 --> 0:30:43.000
<v Speaker 2>get your podcasts.