WEBVTT - Bloomberg Businessweek Weekend - August 7th, 2026

0:00:00.280 --> 0:00:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.

0:00:08.640 --> 0:00:13.000
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg Business Week Daily reporting from the magazine

0:00:13.000 --> 0:00:17.599
<v Speaker 2>that helps global leaders stay ahead with insight on the people, companies,

0:00:17.640 --> 0:00:22.520
<v Speaker 2>and trends shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business finance

0:00:22.560 --> 0:00:25.880
<v Speaker 2>and tech news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week

0:00:25.960 --> 0:00:31.320
<v Speaker 2>Daily Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Steneveek on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:35.040
<v Speaker 3>Hi, everyone, Welcome to the Bloomberg Business Week Weekend Podcast.

0:00:35.440 --> 0:00:38.440
<v Speaker 3>A big focus for everyone this week. I gotta be honest.

0:00:38.840 --> 0:00:41.320
<v Speaker 3>Since the IPO back in June, this has been a countdown.

0:00:41.479 --> 0:00:45.839
<v Speaker 3>We are talking about SpaceX and its earnings. Investors got

0:00:45.840 --> 0:00:50.000
<v Speaker 3>their first look at SpaceX's financials following its landmark IPO.

0:00:50.200 --> 0:00:52.720
<v Speaker 3>For all the details on the results, head to the

0:00:52.760 --> 0:00:55.520
<v Speaker 3>Bloomberg End at Bloomberg dot com. But Tim, like you

0:00:55.640 --> 0:00:58.280
<v Speaker 3>kept saying it wasn't really about earnings because the company

0:00:58.320 --> 0:00:59.600
<v Speaker 3>isn't profitable overall.

0:00:59.680 --> 0:01:02.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that always reminds me. Earnings mean you have earnings,

0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:06.960
<v Speaker 1>and SpaceX didn't have any earnings. Bottom line For investors'

0:01:07.000 --> 0:01:11.160
<v Speaker 1>top line, revenue surged staggering. Capex sent the stock tumbling

0:01:11.240 --> 0:01:14.759
<v Speaker 1>in the release. That theme of the iwatering AI spend.

0:01:15.160 --> 0:01:17.399
<v Speaker 1>It's something we dig into this hour with a noted

0:01:17.400 --> 0:01:19.400
<v Speaker 1>critic of the AI build and spend.

0:01:19.480 --> 0:01:22.039
<v Speaker 3>That tech critic he's also the publisher of Where's Your

0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:25.000
<v Speaker 3>Ed At We're talking about ed Zitron. He's stopped by

0:01:25.040 --> 0:01:27.600
<v Speaker 3>to dissect the hundreds of billions of dollars going into

0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:31.959
<v Speaker 3>the AI capex movement and spend overall, and why the

0:01:32.040 --> 0:01:37.039
<v Speaker 3>massive gap between data center spending and actual AI revenue

0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:41.560
<v Speaker 3>is creating what Ed calls quote an unsustainable circular economy.

0:01:41.640 --> 0:01:43.520
<v Speaker 3>He's kind of not alone in that thinking.

0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:46.600
<v Speaker 1>No, he's definitely not, and I think what he says

0:01:46.680 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 1>really resonates with an audience, and we see that when

0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:53.160
<v Speaker 1>he comes on the program. AI's talked a lot about

0:01:53.400 --> 0:01:55.840
<v Speaker 1>by us here at Bloomberg. You know that at this point,

0:01:56.000 --> 0:01:58.960
<v Speaker 1>so too increasingly our prediction markets and the battles they

0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:00.920
<v Speaker 1>are dealing with when it comes to their role in

0:02:00.960 --> 0:02:03.720
<v Speaker 1>the financial world, and the growing legal challenges that are

0:02:03.800 --> 0:02:04.520
<v Speaker 1>questioning them.

0:02:04.680 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 3>That's right. We wanted to hear how calshe is keeping

0:02:07.280 --> 0:02:10.240
<v Speaker 3>up with all the lawsuits filed against them. We do

0:02:10.320 --> 0:02:13.640
<v Speaker 3>that with Bobby Denault, head of Enforcement and Legal Counsel

0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.680
<v Speaker 3>at calshe needless to say, there's a lot.

0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:19.320
<v Speaker 1>At stake and speaking of high stakes, and back to AI.

0:02:19.680 --> 0:02:23.200
<v Speaker 1>Aaron Brown, Bloomberg opinion columnist and former chief risk manager

0:02:23.240 --> 0:02:27.640
<v Speaker 1>at AQR Capital Management. That's Cliff Asns's fund weighs in

0:02:27.720 --> 0:02:30.679
<v Speaker 1>on the AI hedge fund situational awareness and why is

0:02:30.760 --> 0:02:33.799
<v Speaker 1>staggering four hundred and thirty nine percent first half return

0:02:34.400 --> 0:02:36.919
<v Speaker 1>was a glaring warning sign about market mania.

0:02:37.000 --> 0:02:39.600
<v Speaker 3>All of that to come this hour. We begin with

0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:43.720
<v Speaker 3>legal battles surrounding prediction markets. The recent surge and volume

0:02:43.720 --> 0:02:47.800
<v Speaker 3>across platforms like Calshie and Polymarket has made event based

0:02:47.840 --> 0:02:51.079
<v Speaker 3>trading one of the fastest growing corners of finance.

0:02:51.080 --> 0:02:55.079
<v Speaker 1>Yes, but also growing regulatory scrutiny of these markets. Just

0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:57.960
<v Speaker 1>last week, New York State authorities sued call she for

0:02:58.040 --> 0:03:01.360
<v Speaker 1>allegedly running an illegal on the un licensed gambling operation

0:03:01.480 --> 0:03:04.320
<v Speaker 1>in the state, marking another legal hurdle for an industry

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:06.359
<v Speaker 1>that is one support from the Trump administration.

0:03:06.680 --> 0:03:08.720
<v Speaker 3>We needed to learn more, and so for that we

0:03:08.760 --> 0:03:11.640
<v Speaker 3>caught up with Robert Denault, head of Enforcement and legal

0:03:11.680 --> 0:03:12.800
<v Speaker 3>counsel at Calshie.

0:03:13.160 --> 0:03:15.560
<v Speaker 4>I mean, as both a New Yorker and a lawyer,

0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:19.200
<v Speaker 4>I'm alarmed by the overreaching sentiment that's coming from the

0:03:19.200 --> 0:03:24.720
<v Speaker 4>Attorney General's office. So calshe is a licensed federally regulated exchange.

0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:28.800
<v Speaker 4>By her logic, any federally regulated exchange that's operating with

0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:31.639
<v Speaker 4>a federal license and overseen by a federal regulator can

0:03:31.680 --> 0:03:35.560
<v Speaker 4>suddenly be subject to the whims of state criminal enforcement

0:03:35.720 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 4>if the Attorney General of a particular state wakes up

0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:42.960
<v Speaker 4>and decides one day that these contracts actually come within

0:03:43.040 --> 0:03:46.680
<v Speaker 4>New York state gambling law. That's not how any exchange

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:49.240
<v Speaker 4>in US history has ever operated, right, So we have

0:03:49.720 --> 0:03:51.440
<v Speaker 4>we're here at Bloomberg. You guys talk about the New

0:03:51.520 --> 0:03:55.280
<v Speaker 4>York Stock Exchange NASDAQ, other exchanges, all of them could

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.000
<v Speaker 4>be potentially affected by the breath and scope of the

0:03:58.040 --> 0:04:02.960
<v Speaker 4>New York Attorney generals approach and legal theory in terms

0:04:02.960 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 4>of how she believes she can regulate and bring to

0:04:05.520 --> 0:04:08.120
<v Speaker 4>heal federally licensed exchanges here in New York State.

0:04:08.160 --> 0:04:10.240
<v Speaker 3>Bobby, are you saying you're the exact same things as

0:04:10.280 --> 0:04:12.440
<v Speaker 3>the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAK markets. That

0:04:12.440 --> 0:04:16.400
<v Speaker 3>you're saying you're the exact same thing apples to apples.

0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:19.480
<v Speaker 4>Then what I am saying is that federal law dictates that.

0:04:19.480 --> 0:04:22.159
<v Speaker 4>That is the case when a federal law like the

0:04:22.160 --> 0:04:25.279
<v Speaker 4>Commodity Exchange Act exists and provides for a way for

0:04:25.360 --> 0:04:28.039
<v Speaker 4>an entity to get licensed by something like the Commodity

0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 4>Futures Trading Commission or the Securities Exchange Commission, that licensure

0:04:32.000 --> 0:04:35.720
<v Speaker 4>and that federal regulation is what governs that marketplace. Now,

0:04:35.920 --> 0:04:39.359
<v Speaker 4>if states want to litigate with that regulator on a

0:04:39.440 --> 0:04:41.800
<v Speaker 4>case by case basis about what types of contracts might

0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:44.200
<v Speaker 4>implicate some state laws, that's one question, and that's some

0:04:44.200 --> 0:04:47.080
<v Speaker 4>of the lawsuits we've seen over the last year on sports.

0:04:47.279 --> 0:04:50.760
<v Speaker 4>But this is much more far reaching. This is claiming

0:04:50.800 --> 0:04:53.800
<v Speaker 4>that that license means nothing, and if you don't hold

0:04:53.839 --> 0:04:56.680
<v Speaker 4>a New York license, you're running a criminal operation and

0:04:56.720 --> 0:04:58.120
<v Speaker 4>you need to be run out of the state. And

0:04:58.560 --> 0:05:01.080
<v Speaker 4>I think it's important to ground this sort of in

0:05:01.240 --> 0:05:04.320
<v Speaker 4>history of disruptive sort of new players in marketplaces. Right,

0:05:04.520 --> 0:05:08.080
<v Speaker 4>call she's new, but this sort of licensed regime has

0:05:08.120 --> 0:05:11.839
<v Speaker 4>existed for many decades. We've seen similar playbooks used against

0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:14.719
<v Speaker 4>companies like Uber and Airbnb, where states try to throw

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:17.760
<v Speaker 4>their weight around and bring crazy cases to block what

0:05:17.920 --> 0:05:21.200
<v Speaker 4>customers want. As a reasonable alternative, we think that that's

0:05:21.279 --> 0:05:24.279
<v Speaker 4>a pretty similar playbook to what the Attorney General's following here.

0:05:24.320 --> 0:05:26.880
<v Speaker 1>So why shouldn't cal she seek a license from the

0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:28.960
<v Speaker 1>New York State Gaming Commission? Why wouldn't you do that?

0:05:29.240 --> 0:05:32.000
<v Speaker 4>So it really goes to the way that the business operates.

0:05:32.400 --> 0:05:35.560
<v Speaker 4>We are a federally licensed exchange that requires us to

0:05:35.640 --> 0:05:39.680
<v Speaker 4>run open markets that are available nationwide. Our users set

0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:42.479
<v Speaker 4>the price, traders set the price. We match traders in

0:05:42.520 --> 0:05:45.479
<v Speaker 4>an open marketplace with one another. We are not on

0:05:45.520 --> 0:05:48.320
<v Speaker 4>the other side of individuals trading. We don't run a

0:05:48.320 --> 0:05:50.719
<v Speaker 4>casino where people can come in and drink and play

0:05:50.720 --> 0:05:52.919
<v Speaker 4>card games. We don't run a sports book where we

0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:55.520
<v Speaker 4>profit when people lose. What we do is run open

0:05:55.560 --> 0:05:59.120
<v Speaker 4>marketplaces where users define the price point and that type

0:05:59.120 --> 0:06:01.400
<v Speaker 4>of financial product, even if it touches on topics that

0:06:01.480 --> 0:06:04.479
<v Speaker 4>is similar to a topic touched on by a sportsbook,

0:06:04.640 --> 0:06:08.159
<v Speaker 4>the way that that product operates is typically what governs

0:06:08.160 --> 0:06:09.520
<v Speaker 4>what regulations apply.

0:06:10.520 --> 0:06:15.359
<v Speaker 3>So even though people keep coming at you and say gambling, gambling, gambling,

0:06:16.360 --> 0:06:17.719
<v Speaker 3>that's why you're not gambling.

0:06:18.320 --> 0:06:21.160
<v Speaker 4>So I think it's important to define exactly what they

0:06:21.200 --> 0:06:23.720
<v Speaker 4>mean when they say gambling. To me, gambling is when

0:06:23.760 --> 0:06:25.599
<v Speaker 4>you go up against the house. When you go to

0:06:25.640 --> 0:06:27.720
<v Speaker 4>a place that controls whether you're going to win or lose,

0:06:27.760 --> 0:06:29.880
<v Speaker 4>they're going to chase losers, They're going to maximize their

0:06:29.920 --> 0:06:32.640
<v Speaker 4>ability to limit winners. They're not going to run like

0:06:32.680 --> 0:06:36.760
<v Speaker 4>a true business. But where an exchange exists and individuals

0:06:36.800 --> 0:06:39.000
<v Speaker 4>are setting price with one another, I think that it

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:42.240
<v Speaker 4>operates under a different regulatory framework. And it's not to

0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:45.479
<v Speaker 4>say that a whole panoply of different topics can be

0:06:45.560 --> 0:06:49.560
<v Speaker 4>touched on by different regulated products. So we see concerns

0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:52.760
<v Speaker 4>in options trading or leverage trading, retail traders moving into

0:06:52.800 --> 0:06:55.960
<v Speaker 4>markets that are traditionally regulated markets at the federal level,

0:06:56.160 --> 0:06:58.520
<v Speaker 4>I think some of the same concerns exist for those markets.

0:06:58.560 --> 0:07:01.080
<v Speaker 4>And if you read the lawsuit closely, a ton of

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:03.640
<v Speaker 4>the definitions and the language and the descriptions that Attorney

0:07:03.640 --> 0:07:08.520
<v Speaker 4>General James's office uses could easily be transposed onto robinhood,

0:07:08.800 --> 0:07:12.920
<v Speaker 4>crypto trading, derivatives trading, any sort of trading activity that

0:07:12.920 --> 0:07:16.120
<v Speaker 4>the Attorney General suddenly decides poses a customer threat to

0:07:16.160 --> 0:07:18.040
<v Speaker 4>individuals who want to participate in I mean.

0:07:17.880 --> 0:07:20.800
<v Speaker 1>There is In April, she did sue coinbase in Gemini

0:07:20.800 --> 0:07:24.480
<v Speaker 1>for running illegal gambling platforms. There were some like why

0:07:24.520 --> 0:07:26.160
<v Speaker 1>do you think call she was signaled out in this

0:07:26.560 --> 0:07:29.320
<v Speaker 1>typical or this this iteration of the lawsuit.

0:07:29.720 --> 0:07:32.280
<v Speaker 4>You'd have to ask the Governor's office, why you know

0:07:32.360 --> 0:07:35.680
<v Speaker 4>call She's was signal signaled out. I think the truth

0:07:35.760 --> 0:07:37.840
<v Speaker 4>is there are a number of prediction markets that would

0:07:37.840 --> 0:07:40.040
<v Speaker 4>be affected by this approach. There's a number of other

0:07:40.120 --> 0:07:43.080
<v Speaker 4>exchanges that would be affected. There are number of like

0:07:43.160 --> 0:07:47.520
<v Speaker 4>robin Hood's based in New York, right, novig Polymarket, They're

0:07:47.560 --> 0:07:49.320
<v Speaker 4>all based in New York, none of whom have been

0:07:49.360 --> 0:07:51.760
<v Speaker 4>subject to the Attorney General's focus. So I don't know

0:07:51.760 --> 0:07:53.400
<v Speaker 4>if that's coming. I don't know if you'd have to

0:07:53.400 --> 0:07:56.040
<v Speaker 4>ask her office, but certainly, you know, we're a bit

0:07:56.080 --> 0:07:59.560
<v Speaker 4>alarmed that the Attorney General is seeing the scope of

0:07:59.600 --> 0:08:04.440
<v Speaker 4>New York gambling law applying to potentially federal derivatives exchanges.

0:08:04.600 --> 0:08:07.960
<v Speaker 3>But I do think about exchanges. Do you think about

0:08:08.000 --> 0:08:10.560
<v Speaker 3>the composition of the bets that are on Like if

0:08:10.560 --> 0:08:13.920
<v Speaker 3>we're going to use the gambling analogy that keeps getting

0:08:14.160 --> 0:08:17.040
<v Speaker 3>kind of lobbied at you. I mean, if I think

0:08:17.080 --> 0:08:20.840
<v Speaker 3>about exchange, there is incredible oversight, you know, and there's

0:08:21.000 --> 0:08:24.360
<v Speaker 3>rules and so that there isn't you know, trades that

0:08:24.400 --> 0:08:27.400
<v Speaker 3>are happening that are not legit or fair or right.

0:08:28.040 --> 0:08:31.280
<v Speaker 3>You know, if if gambling is as you say, there

0:08:31.360 --> 0:08:35.600
<v Speaker 3>is no house, right, it's just two parties figuring out something.

0:08:35.960 --> 0:08:39.320
<v Speaker 3>Where is the oversight and concern about the composition of

0:08:39.360 --> 0:08:42.440
<v Speaker 3>the bets being made and making sure that they are true?

0:08:42.480 --> 0:08:44.760
<v Speaker 3>Because I think that's where you're get into gambling. If

0:08:44.800 --> 0:08:46.840
<v Speaker 3>anybody can kind of put up a bet and another

0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:49.080
<v Speaker 3>person can take the side, and who knows if those

0:08:49.120 --> 0:08:51.360
<v Speaker 3>two sides didn't get together to figure out this bet,

0:08:51.400 --> 0:08:53.880
<v Speaker 3>like you know what I'm saying, So that to me

0:08:54.400 --> 0:08:57.000
<v Speaker 3>is where you get into the gambling. It's a little

0:08:57.320 --> 0:08:58.480
<v Speaker 3>it feels a little loose.

0:08:58.720 --> 0:09:01.600
<v Speaker 4>Sure, I don't think it's loose at all. So I

0:09:01.679 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 4>think that when you're just to sort of zero in

0:09:04.920 --> 0:09:07.480
<v Speaker 4>on some of the nuance that you just said, gambling

0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:09.760
<v Speaker 4>is when there is the house. What you do on

0:09:09.800 --> 0:09:12.120
<v Speaker 4>an exchange is where there is no house, there are

0:09:12.120 --> 0:09:15.240
<v Speaker 4>two counterparties in a particular market agreeing on a price

0:09:15.320 --> 0:09:18.040
<v Speaker 4>together and executing what we characterize as a swap, what

0:09:18.120 --> 0:09:21.640
<v Speaker 4>the CEA qualifies as a swap. Those types of trades

0:09:21.800 --> 0:09:25.400
<v Speaker 4>are heavily regulated under CFTC regulation. There are hundreds of regulations.

0:09:25.480 --> 0:09:27.400
<v Speaker 3>You're saying all the trades that are happening on Kowshi

0:09:27.440 --> 0:09:29.880
<v Speaker 3>will be heavily regulated and overset, And we understand the

0:09:29.920 --> 0:09:30.480
<v Speaker 3>two sides.

0:09:30.559 --> 0:09:33.720
<v Speaker 4>They are currently heavily regulated and being overseen. I meet

0:09:33.720 --> 0:09:36.240
<v Speaker 4>with the CFTC's Enforcement Division. That's my line of work

0:09:36.280 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 4>at Kalshi. I lead our exchange enforcement. I meet with

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:41.960
<v Speaker 4>their Enforcement division multiple times a week. But separately, they

0:09:41.960 --> 0:09:45.920
<v Speaker 4>have other divisions division Market Oversight, other divisions that oversee

0:09:45.960 --> 0:09:48.920
<v Speaker 4>the implementation of markets so that they are structurally fair

0:09:49.320 --> 0:09:53.480
<v Speaker 4>for the participants operating in them, and that oversight requires

0:09:53.559 --> 0:09:56.120
<v Speaker 4>Kalshi as an exchange, but all prediction market exchanges to

0:09:56.160 --> 0:09:58.600
<v Speaker 4>work very closely with the CFTC on the products that

0:09:58.600 --> 0:10:01.360
<v Speaker 4>they offer. They have to sell certify them to the CFTC,

0:10:01.720 --> 0:10:05.200
<v Speaker 4>who can revoke approval for those products. And the CFTC

0:10:05.280 --> 0:10:07.600
<v Speaker 4>recently came out with a two hundred and sixty seven

0:10:07.600 --> 0:10:10.640
<v Speaker 4>page rule making that was specific toward prediction market contract

0:10:10.720 --> 0:10:13.000
<v Speaker 4>So I think you know it isn't correct to say

0:10:13.000 --> 0:10:14.760
<v Speaker 4>these aren't currently heavily regulated.

0:10:15.000 --> 0:10:17.440
<v Speaker 1>We're speaking with Bobby Denald, he's head of Enforcement and

0:10:17.480 --> 0:10:19.640
<v Speaker 1>Legal counsel at Kalshe He joins us here in the

0:10:19.640 --> 0:10:22.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg BusinessWeek studio, I want to shift gears and talk

0:10:22.040 --> 0:10:24.439
<v Speaker 1>about some other recent news. It seems like you're really

0:10:24.440 --> 0:10:26.640
<v Speaker 1>playing whack a mole at this point with these lawsuits.

0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:29.640
<v Speaker 1>Like obviously it's keeping you busy. Also keeping you busy

0:10:29.640 --> 0:10:32.720
<v Speaker 1>as enforcement and former Congressman George Santos agreed to pay

0:10:32.760 --> 0:10:35.280
<v Speaker 1>more than thirty five thousand dollars to settle allegations that

0:10:35.320 --> 0:10:38.199
<v Speaker 1>he manipulated a wager on your platform about whether he'd

0:10:38.200 --> 0:10:40.400
<v Speaker 1>attend the twenty twenty six State of the Union. Is

0:10:40.400 --> 0:10:42.640
<v Speaker 1>it your responsibility to police that. Are you the one

0:10:42.679 --> 0:10:45.120
<v Speaker 1>who recognized that and flagged it?

0:10:45.400 --> 0:10:47.320
<v Speaker 4>Yes, it is our responsibility to police that.

0:10:47.400 --> 0:10:49.959
<v Speaker 1>Do you have the resources like this is one example,

0:10:49.960 --> 0:10:52.760
<v Speaker 1>But do you have the resources to find every single

0:10:52.800 --> 0:10:55.680
<v Speaker 1>one of them that allegedly has insider information?

0:10:55.960 --> 0:10:59.240
<v Speaker 4>So I'd pause there and say, that's not our standard

0:10:59.280 --> 0:11:01.240
<v Speaker 4>at the New York stylelock exchange, and that's not our

0:11:01.280 --> 0:11:03.800
<v Speaker 4>standard in the securities and equities markets. What we expect

0:11:04.120 --> 0:11:07.640
<v Speaker 4>our federally regulated exchanges to do is to have reasonable

0:11:07.640 --> 0:11:12.040
<v Speaker 4>procedures to detect insider trading, market manipulation, etc. Calhi has

0:11:12.320 --> 0:11:15.720
<v Speaker 4>very robust and in fact more robust than stock exchanges

0:11:16.200 --> 0:11:19.640
<v Speaker 4>policing measures to prevent and detect insider trade. We do

0:11:19.760 --> 0:11:23.040
<v Speaker 4>have twenty four to seven market surveillance. We use a

0:11:23.080 --> 0:11:26.040
<v Speaker 4>surveillance vendor, but also in the coming days are going

0:11:26.040 --> 0:11:29.600
<v Speaker 4>to announce an expansion of our surveillance systems and we

0:11:29.679 --> 0:11:32.640
<v Speaker 4>police these markets both in real time and in retrospect,

0:11:32.800 --> 0:11:35.560
<v Speaker 4>and we work with the CFTC to investigate specific markets

0:11:35.600 --> 0:11:38.640
<v Speaker 4>and detect anomalous activity in those markets. We did detect

0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:42.160
<v Speaker 4>the trading activity by mister Santos. We conducted an investigation

0:11:42.280 --> 0:11:44.679
<v Speaker 4>that involved an interview with mister Santos, and we referred

0:11:45.200 --> 0:11:48.200
<v Speaker 4>the entire matter and the evidence that we collected the CFTC,

0:11:48.240 --> 0:11:51.560
<v Speaker 4>which allowed them to pursue enforcement. But separately, in the

0:11:51.559 --> 0:11:55.840
<v Speaker 4>derivatives and commodities space, these exchanges, like ours, have a

0:11:55.880 --> 0:11:58.960
<v Speaker 4>responsibility to also bring enforcement actions directly against the users

0:11:59.000 --> 0:12:02.400
<v Speaker 4>who participate on them, and so we pursue direct exchange

0:12:02.480 --> 0:12:06.000
<v Speaker 4>enforcement in areas where individuals come on and violate our

0:12:06.200 --> 0:12:07.720
<v Speaker 4>CFTC approved exchange rules.

0:12:07.720 --> 0:12:11.040
<v Speaker 3>And since that's happening, and how many investigations are you triggering,

0:12:11.080 --> 0:12:12.760
<v Speaker 3>like on a daily basis, or a weekly.

0:12:12.520 --> 0:12:17.120
<v Speaker 4>Basis, so we sort of estimate quarterly, and volumes upticked

0:12:17.160 --> 0:12:19.720
<v Speaker 4>quite a bit, So the investigations have upticked quite a bit,

0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:21.560
<v Speaker 4>but somewhere between one hundred and fifty and two hundred

0:12:21.559 --> 0:12:24.760
<v Speaker 4>and fifty a quarter become material investigations. We make a

0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:27.000
<v Speaker 4>number of referrals. I think year to date we've probably

0:12:27.040 --> 0:12:30.120
<v Speaker 4>made about forty or fifty referrals to the CFTC. These

0:12:30.160 --> 0:12:32.920
<v Speaker 4>matters take time, though the legal process. Everybody deserves due

0:12:32.920 --> 0:12:35.600
<v Speaker 4>process rights, yep, So we afford people do process. We've

0:12:35.640 --> 0:12:38.920
<v Speaker 4>settled or brought disciplinary actions in a number of cases.

0:12:38.960 --> 0:12:40.840
<v Speaker 4>We're going to continue to do so. By the end

0:12:40.840 --> 0:12:42.760
<v Speaker 4>of the year, you know, I'm sure you'll see a

0:12:42.840 --> 0:12:46.560
<v Speaker 4>meaningful number of actions. I put for context, the SEC

0:12:46.600 --> 0:12:48.640
<v Speaker 4>in the last year of the Biden administration bought thirty

0:12:48.640 --> 0:12:52.280
<v Speaker 4>five insider trading actions, So you know, I think the

0:12:52.320 --> 0:12:54.800
<v Speaker 4>expectation somewhere in the ballpark of that number.

0:12:54.920 --> 0:12:56.840
<v Speaker 1>Do you think that there's some markets that are listed

0:12:56.840 --> 0:13:00.120
<v Speaker 1>on KYSHI that are more susceptible to manipulation than others?

0:13:00.840 --> 0:13:04.640
<v Speaker 4>I think, much like insider trading in the traditional securities

0:13:04.640 --> 0:13:07.400
<v Speaker 4>and equities markets, there are certain paradigms that exist that

0:13:07.440 --> 0:13:10.400
<v Speaker 4>create more likelihood for insider or manipulation.

0:13:10.000 --> 0:13:11.800
<v Speaker 1>Risk, like mentioned markets.

0:13:11.840 --> 0:13:15.319
<v Speaker 4>Perhaps you know, I think mention markets are a unique category.

0:13:16.040 --> 0:13:19.800
<v Speaker 4>I don't know that they're necessarily more susceptible to insider risk,

0:13:19.880 --> 0:13:22.000
<v Speaker 4>but I can see the context or argument for saying

0:13:22.040 --> 0:13:25.000
<v Speaker 4>they maybe are more susceptible to manipulation where one person

0:13:25.040 --> 0:13:27.280
<v Speaker 4>controls what word they say. On the counter of that,

0:13:27.800 --> 0:13:30.360
<v Speaker 4>there's a small pool of people who could possibly be

0:13:30.520 --> 0:13:33.200
<v Speaker 4>capable of manipulating that market. Because we're in exchange that

0:13:33.240 --> 0:13:37.319
<v Speaker 4>collects user information, we follow KYC know your customer rules

0:13:37.320 --> 0:13:39.720
<v Speaker 4>for every single individual trading on the exchange, we have

0:13:39.720 --> 0:13:42.079
<v Speaker 4>a pretty good idea of who's taking positions in certain

0:13:42.080 --> 0:13:44.760
<v Speaker 4>markets that allows us to police mention markets, just like

0:13:44.800 --> 0:13:45.559
<v Speaker 4>we police all market.

0:13:45.600 --> 0:13:49.360
<v Speaker 3>You're talking about Calsey public companies, right, I just are no.

0:13:49.480 --> 0:13:50.480
<v Speaker 5>I mean, yeah, that's part of it.

0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:51.760
<v Speaker 1>I mean, that's the new Just.

0:13:52.080 --> 0:13:55.040
<v Speaker 3>Sixty seconds, I know, we've got to run it's interesting

0:13:55.120 --> 0:14:00.240
<v Speaker 3>earnings updates, KPI forecasts, earnings I do, and I'm thinking, God,

0:14:00.320 --> 0:14:03.120
<v Speaker 3>does this replace ultimately the earnings estimates that we follow?

0:14:03.400 --> 0:14:04.000
<v Speaker 3>Is that the goal?

0:14:04.160 --> 0:14:06.400
<v Speaker 4>Just quickly, I think there's two goals. I think the

0:14:06.480 --> 0:14:08.720
<v Speaker 4>first goal is what we find is so many people

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:11.600
<v Speaker 4>are using Kalshi as a resource just to obtain information.

0:14:11.720 --> 0:14:13.959
<v Speaker 4>Seventy five percent of people who visit the platform are

0:14:13.960 --> 0:14:17.160
<v Speaker 4>there just to look to learn, They're not there to trade.

0:14:17.240 --> 0:14:19.160
<v Speaker 4>And so this is a resource for people who might

0:14:19.200 --> 0:14:20.880
<v Speaker 4>be on a trading desk, people who might be in

0:14:20.920 --> 0:14:23.520
<v Speaker 4>a financial position where they want to analyze these really

0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:28.160
<v Speaker 4>subtopic financial questions about a particular KPI. But you know,

0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:31.160
<v Speaker 4>of course, we are seeing academic research that shows these

0:14:31.160 --> 0:14:34.520
<v Speaker 4>are somehow and sometimes more accurate than our traditional metrics

0:14:34.720 --> 0:14:37.560
<v Speaker 4>and financial markets, and so it's exciting to develop further

0:14:37.560 --> 0:14:38.720
<v Speaker 4>in that Spaceically, we've come back and.

0:14:38.720 --> 0:14:41.360
<v Speaker 3>Talk more about this, so I am fascinated about kind

0:14:41.360 --> 0:14:44.520
<v Speaker 3>of where this goes and who will all be on it. Bobby,

0:14:44.560 --> 0:14:45.240
<v Speaker 3>thank you so much.

0:14:49.000 --> 0:14:53.000
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily podcast. Catch us

0:14:53.080 --> 0:14:56.520
<v Speaker 2>live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen

0:14:56.560 --> 0:15:00.120
<v Speaker 2>on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,

0:15:00.240 --> 0:15:02.040
<v Speaker 2>or watch us live on YouTube.

0:15:02.840 --> 0:15:05.280
<v Speaker 3>This past week, we got further information that points to

0:15:05.320 --> 0:15:09.160
<v Speaker 3>Microsoft generating most of its AI revenues and likely about

0:15:09.200 --> 0:15:13.160
<v Speaker 3>seventy percent from one customer open AI. This is all

0:15:13.160 --> 0:15:17.640
<v Speaker 3>according to new Microsoft company disclosures. Under an agreement between

0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 3>the two companies, Open Ai pays Microsoft our computing power,

0:15:21.480 --> 0:15:24.640
<v Speaker 3>costs associated with building AI models, and a share of

0:15:24.680 --> 0:15:25.400
<v Speaker 3>its revenue.

0:15:25.520 --> 0:15:28.280
<v Speaker 1>Our next guest says that is worth watching here to

0:15:28.280 --> 0:15:31.640
<v Speaker 1>pull apart big text catpecs obsession and why he believes

0:15:31.640 --> 0:15:35.120
<v Speaker 1>this circular ecosystem is nearing a tipping point is ed Zitron.

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:37.960
<v Speaker 1>He's CEO of Easy Primary Research. He's the host of

0:15:38.000 --> 0:15:40.880
<v Speaker 1>the Better Offline podcast And to note, we caught up

0:15:40.920 --> 0:15:44.080
<v Speaker 1>with that before the news broke of Microsoft's AI sales.

0:15:44.560 --> 0:15:48.040
<v Speaker 3>Where are we in terms of the AI narrative in

0:15:48.080 --> 0:15:49.440
<v Speaker 3>your view and what's the reality?

0:15:49.840 --> 0:15:52.520
<v Speaker 6>Well, I think investors have to ask a question right now,

0:15:52.640 --> 0:15:55.200
<v Speaker 6>what am I getting into when I invest in Microsoft, Google,

0:15:55.240 --> 0:15:58.840
<v Speaker 6>and Amazon. So UBS estimates that twenty seven percent of

0:15:58.880 --> 0:16:02.200
<v Speaker 6>Google Clouds revenue this year will be open ai and anthropic,

0:16:02.360 --> 0:16:05.720
<v Speaker 6>increasing to over forty eight percent next year. That is

0:16:05.720 --> 0:16:07.560
<v Speaker 6>a remarkable amount of money. It's going to be over

0:16:07.600 --> 0:16:11.000
<v Speaker 6>one hundred and twenty four billion dollars next year. Everyone

0:16:11.080 --> 0:16:13.240
<v Speaker 6>is buying into these stocks because they believe all of

0:16:13.280 --> 0:16:17.160
<v Speaker 6>that capex is going towards diverse and spread out AI demand,

0:16:17.320 --> 0:16:20.120
<v Speaker 6>when in fact, what it's actually doing is helping create

0:16:20.200 --> 0:16:23.960
<v Speaker 6>infrastructure for two unprofitable, unsustainable companies.

0:16:24.560 --> 0:16:27.520
<v Speaker 1>So those the other one would be anthropic. Yes, you argue,

0:16:27.600 --> 0:16:29.280
<v Speaker 1>so give us more data because you have the micro

0:16:29.360 --> 0:16:32.480
<v Speaker 1>you're citing Microsoft, But what about AWL, Well.

0:16:32.320 --> 0:16:34.440
<v Speaker 6>That was what I was saying. So Barclay's actually says

0:16:34.480 --> 0:16:37.120
<v Speaker 6>that this year thirteen percent of AWS revenue will be

0:16:37.120 --> 0:16:40.040
<v Speaker 6>both open air and anthropic, and next year will be

0:16:40.080 --> 0:16:43.440
<v Speaker 6>eighteen percent. AWS much bigger business than Google Cloud. Now,

0:16:43.520 --> 0:16:45.240
<v Speaker 6>just to be clear, when I was saying that twenty

0:16:45.320 --> 0:16:48.360
<v Speaker 6>seven percent this year and forty eight percent next year

0:16:48.400 --> 0:16:51.480
<v Speaker 6>for Google Cloud, I meant both anthropic and open al Okay,

0:16:51.560 --> 0:16:53.600
<v Speaker 6>most people don't know that open ai is a large

0:16:53.640 --> 0:16:56.200
<v Speaker 6>customer of Google Cloud. It's not a well, it's not

0:16:56.240 --> 0:16:58.720
<v Speaker 6>a well known fact. But this was this was actually

0:16:58.760 --> 0:16:59.840
<v Speaker 6>mentioned by you.

0:17:00.080 --> 0:17:02.320
<v Speaker 1>Yes is Stephen jew So where would those companies be

0:17:02.480 --> 0:17:05.000
<v Speaker 1>right now without anthropic and without open ai?

0:17:05.160 --> 0:17:07.560
<v Speaker 6>Well, I have serious questions about that. So in counter

0:17:07.680 --> 0:17:10.280
<v Speaker 6>year twenty twenty five, according to my own reporting about

0:17:10.280 --> 0:17:13.680
<v Speaker 6>open aiy's numbers, sixty nine percent if the year over

0:17:13.760 --> 0:17:17.520
<v Speaker 6>year growth of Microsoft Intelligent Cloud segment was actually from

0:17:17.520 --> 0:17:20.320
<v Speaker 6>open Ai. Without that, it would have only grown eight

0:17:20.320 --> 0:17:23.119
<v Speaker 6>percent year of view, which is barely beating inflation. And

0:17:23.200 --> 0:17:26.199
<v Speaker 6>so everyone is being sold what I consider kind of

0:17:26.200 --> 0:17:28.240
<v Speaker 6>a lie. It's honestly kind of a scandal.

0:17:28.560 --> 0:17:30.800
<v Speaker 3>So this goes back to I feel like we have

0:17:30.880 --> 0:17:35.479
<v Speaker 3>companies the circular financing the circularity of it all, and

0:17:35.560 --> 0:17:40.720
<v Speaker 3>kind of creating demand for their products. So when does

0:17:40.760 --> 0:17:42.200
<v Speaker 3>the party end? In your view?

0:17:42.560 --> 0:17:44.800
<v Speaker 6>So with open Aiy's IPO, I think that could be

0:17:44.800 --> 0:17:46.919
<v Speaker 6>one of the flashpoints. Remember, this company was meant to

0:17:46.920 --> 0:17:49.080
<v Speaker 6>go public this year. They failed about a month or

0:17:49.119 --> 0:17:51.320
<v Speaker 6>two ago, and now the New York Times has reported

0:17:51.320 --> 0:17:54.680
<v Speaker 6>that they're considering they are delaying until twenty twenty seven.

0:17:55.000 --> 0:17:57.640
<v Speaker 6>That's lethal for a number of people. But open Ai

0:17:57.680 --> 0:18:01.199
<v Speaker 6>and Anthropic need continual flow of capital. They do not

0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:04.240
<v Speaker 6>pay their bills out of existing cash flow, so when

0:18:04.280 --> 0:18:06.760
<v Speaker 6>anything happens to that cash, I think that's the first

0:18:07.600 --> 0:18:10.160
<v Speaker 6>kind of domino to four. But then again, there's also

0:18:10.200 --> 0:18:12.680
<v Speaker 6>the overall problem of data center's just not getting built

0:18:12.800 --> 0:18:16.080
<v Speaker 6>very fast, taking about twelve to thirty six months, depending

0:18:16.119 --> 0:18:18.880
<v Speaker 6>on how small or larger data center is actually being

0:18:18.920 --> 0:18:22.280
<v Speaker 6>built at And the problem is is that everyone believes

0:18:22.280 --> 0:18:24.720
<v Speaker 6>that AI is coming out of cash flow, that AI

0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:27.199
<v Speaker 6>is coming out of just this diverse revenue base, when

0:18:27.240 --> 0:18:30.119
<v Speaker 6>it's really not. It's extremely narrow. The Information reported a

0:18:30.119 --> 0:18:32.800
<v Speaker 6>few months ago that eighty nine percent of the largest

0:18:32.800 --> 0:18:36.000
<v Speaker 6>AI companies, well, their revenue comes just from open AI

0:18:36.040 --> 0:18:38.240
<v Speaker 6>and anthropic it's heavily centralized.

0:18:38.320 --> 0:18:40.760
<v Speaker 3>Doesn't it have to be centralized to some extent? This

0:18:40.800 --> 0:18:43.280
<v Speaker 3>is expensive to do or no in terms of data

0:18:43.280 --> 0:18:45.000
<v Speaker 3>center build out and so on and so forth. And

0:18:45.080 --> 0:18:48.160
<v Speaker 3>what's going to make AI generative?

0:18:48.200 --> 0:18:48.440
<v Speaker 5>AI?

0:18:49.320 --> 0:18:51.760
<v Speaker 3>The ability for it to be really, really good is

0:18:51.840 --> 0:18:54.199
<v Speaker 3>having access to lots of information. So doesn't it have

0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:56.640
<v Speaker 3>to be to some extent ed concentrated.

0:18:56.840 --> 0:18:59.720
<v Speaker 6>Well, when I say concentration, I mean concentration of revenue

0:18:59.840 --> 0:19:00.840
<v Speaker 6>in these two companies.

0:19:00.880 --> 0:19:02.879
<v Speaker 3>No, I understand, but to make it good. So doesn't

0:19:02.880 --> 0:19:05.720
<v Speaker 3>it make sense that those who are expose the most

0:19:05.840 --> 0:19:07.639
<v Speaker 3>it's going to be concentrated to some extent.

0:19:07.680 --> 0:19:10.360
<v Speaker 6>Well, I mean when we're talking about so Siteline Climates

0:19:10.400 --> 0:19:12.879
<v Speaker 6>said that they saw back in February about one hundred

0:19:12.880 --> 0:19:15.600
<v Speaker 6>and ninety gig what's worth of data center capacity being

0:19:15.640 --> 0:19:17.840
<v Speaker 6>built in the next few years. It was built or

0:19:17.920 --> 0:19:20.159
<v Speaker 6>under planning. Now, if you work that out.

0:19:20.000 --> 0:19:20.520
<v Speaker 5>With a PUE.

0:19:20.640 --> 0:19:23.160
<v Speaker 6>So just the efficiency rating of one point three, you're

0:19:23.200 --> 0:19:25.920
<v Speaker 6>coming out to twelve million O megawatt over one point

0:19:25.960 --> 0:19:29.760
<v Speaker 6>six trillion dollars of annual revenue needed to satiate those

0:19:29.840 --> 0:19:32.919
<v Speaker 6>data centers. Having two customers is not going to do that.

0:19:33.280 --> 0:19:36.800
<v Speaker 6>Even that, they're most spendy and rober and open Ai

0:19:37.359 --> 0:19:39.520
<v Speaker 6>they can't afford anything they need venture Cappital, but they're

0:19:39.520 --> 0:19:41.879
<v Speaker 6>only going to spend four hundred billion a year, and

0:19:41.880 --> 0:19:43.600
<v Speaker 6>that's if they get that far, which I don't believe

0:19:43.600 --> 0:19:43.960
<v Speaker 6>they will.

0:19:44.160 --> 0:19:45.840
<v Speaker 3>How much do we know about their balance sheets?

0:19:45.840 --> 0:19:50.000
<v Speaker 6>Really, really well, I from personal experience a great deal

0:19:50.000 --> 0:19:52.240
<v Speaker 6>about open ayes because I reported their aud to do

0:19:52.400 --> 0:19:55.679
<v Speaker 6>financials with the Financial Times right, and it's a company

0:19:55.720 --> 0:19:57.880
<v Speaker 6>just burning cash. They lost twenty point nine billion dollars

0:19:57.920 --> 0:20:01.199
<v Speaker 6>in twenty twenty five and things aren getting worse. And

0:20:01.200 --> 0:20:04.479
<v Speaker 6>what's crazy as well, was over eight hundred million dollars

0:20:04.520 --> 0:20:07.240
<v Speaker 6>of open Eyes revenue came from soft Bank for their

0:20:07.320 --> 0:20:10.200
<v Speaker 6>Crystal Intelligence and yes that's really what it's called, their

0:20:10.200 --> 0:20:13.639
<v Speaker 6>crystalli Intelligence program, which I can find no evidence of

0:20:13.680 --> 0:20:17.000
<v Speaker 6>actually anything happening. And soft Bank a large shareholder of

0:20:17.000 --> 0:20:18.960
<v Speaker 6>open Ai, with no board seats.

0:20:19.000 --> 0:20:23.240
<v Speaker 3>Like you talk about for Google Cloud the exposure rate

0:20:23.840 --> 0:20:26.000
<v Speaker 3>and you said forty eight percent next year. In terms

0:20:26.000 --> 0:20:29.159
<v Speaker 3>of these two customers, I have to say that there

0:20:29.160 --> 0:20:33.400
<v Speaker 3>are smart people running these companies. And normally you would

0:20:33.400 --> 0:20:35.679
<v Speaker 3>say your exposure to just a handful of customers is

0:20:35.680 --> 0:20:38.680
<v Speaker 3>not a great thing. Do you say that these companies

0:20:38.680 --> 0:20:41.680
<v Speaker 3>that aren't doing their due diligence be it Alphabet or

0:20:42.080 --> 0:20:43.520
<v Speaker 3>you know, pick your hyperscaler.

0:20:43.880 --> 0:20:46.280
<v Speaker 6>I think they did the due diligence in the sense

0:20:46.320 --> 0:20:48.520
<v Speaker 6>that they said, we are going to create our largest

0:20:48.520 --> 0:20:50.760
<v Speaker 6>customers and we're going to own large parts of them,

0:20:51.040 --> 0:20:53.280
<v Speaker 6>and on top of that, we're going to own all

0:20:53.320 --> 0:20:56.359
<v Speaker 6>of their infrastructure. Google has a nice they have a

0:20:56.440 --> 0:20:59.600
<v Speaker 6>nice thing going here. Yeah, by TPUs from well sorry,

0:21:00.080 --> 0:21:03.520
<v Speaker 6>comm sells TPUs to Google. They are then sold to

0:21:03.560 --> 0:21:06.720
<v Speaker 6>Anthropic and then rented back to Anthropic through Google, Google

0:21:06.760 --> 0:21:09.480
<v Speaker 6>gets to double up on revenue. This sounds really good

0:21:09.560 --> 0:21:12.160
<v Speaker 6>right up until you realize that Anthropic and open Ai

0:21:12.240 --> 0:21:15.919
<v Speaker 6>are unsustainable. So what they may be. And the problem

0:21:15.960 --> 0:21:17.960
<v Speaker 6>is with saying these are smart people is it immediately

0:21:18.000 --> 0:21:20.600
<v Speaker 6>makes me think of Enron, the smartest guys in the room,

0:21:20.600 --> 0:21:22.280
<v Speaker 6>not saying anything like that's happening.

0:21:22.480 --> 0:21:25.040
<v Speaker 3>But I'm just saying you have a fiduciary responsibility, and

0:21:25.040 --> 0:21:26.959
<v Speaker 3>you're right. You go back to Enron.

0:21:28.359 --> 0:21:31.040
<v Speaker 6>And I think the point I'm making is with Google,

0:21:31.520 --> 0:21:34.160
<v Speaker 6>they probably thought they would be more customers. I imagine

0:21:34.160 --> 0:21:36.840
<v Speaker 6>with Azure and with Aws they thought would be more

0:21:36.920 --> 0:21:39.480
<v Speaker 6>large players. But the problem with Anthropic and open Ai

0:21:39.640 --> 0:21:41.760
<v Speaker 6>is they've raised two hundred and three hundred billion dollars

0:21:42.080 --> 0:21:45.440
<v Speaker 6>of funding, but they've actually raised more because open Ai

0:21:45.480 --> 0:21:48.280
<v Speaker 6>and Anthropic got all of their infrastructure built for them

0:21:48.440 --> 0:21:51.240
<v Speaker 6>by Microsoft, Google and Amazon, they didn't have to pay

0:21:51.320 --> 0:21:54.520
<v Speaker 6>I think in the samman Elon Musk trial one of

0:21:54.520 --> 0:21:58.000
<v Speaker 6>the Microsoft executives said that they cost one hundred billion dollars.

0:21:58.240 --> 0:22:00.720
<v Speaker 6>So call it like seventy eighty billion dollars infrastructure.

0:22:00.800 --> 0:22:00.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:22:00.960 --> 0:22:03.320
<v Speaker 6>So the problem is is that nobody else can get

0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:04.960
<v Speaker 6>as big as them. No one else can get that

0:22:05.040 --> 0:22:07.160
<v Speaker 6>much compute, no one else could have fold that compute

0:22:07.200 --> 0:22:09.720
<v Speaker 6>and have the chance to do the pre training runs necessary.

0:22:10.280 --> 0:22:13.520
<v Speaker 6>Except now China is coming up behind them, and it's

0:22:13.800 --> 0:22:17.200
<v Speaker 6>unclear how anyone really deals with any of the problems

0:22:17.240 --> 0:22:20.600
<v Speaker 6>I've been listening for years, which is unsustainable, unprofitable, and

0:22:20.640 --> 0:22:23.640
<v Speaker 6>also not really funding the ROI and II.

0:22:23.680 --> 0:22:26.919
<v Speaker 1>Ed play this out for us because I think a

0:22:26.920 --> 0:22:30.120
<v Speaker 1>lot of people think, okay, for there to be some

0:22:30.160 --> 0:22:33.280
<v Speaker 1>sort of ROI on this one thing has to happen.

0:22:33.600 --> 0:22:36.879
<v Speaker 1>And like the best case scenario for all this money

0:22:36.920 --> 0:22:41.680
<v Speaker 1>being spent is that productivity increases, Fewer people are needed

0:22:41.680 --> 0:22:44.760
<v Speaker 1>to do more things. There are some serious implications if

0:22:44.760 --> 0:22:46.600
<v Speaker 1>that were to come true and to the labor for

0:22:46.720 --> 0:22:49.199
<v Speaker 1>us and dario Amidae of Anthropic has talked about this

0:22:49.560 --> 0:22:52.119
<v Speaker 1>in the past. Maybe he's talking his book. I don't know.

0:22:52.400 --> 0:22:54.479
<v Speaker 1>The other side of this is, well, if that doesn't

0:22:54.480 --> 0:22:57.280
<v Speaker 1>come true, then what does it mean for these stocks

0:22:57.280 --> 0:23:00.879
<v Speaker 1>that have gained so much on hopes that they would

0:23:00.920 --> 0:23:04.040
<v Speaker 1>be responsible for some of this productivity increase? Like how

0:23:04.040 --> 0:23:05.120
<v Speaker 1>does the shoe drop?

0:23:05.160 --> 0:23:05.720
<v Speaker 5>What happens?

0:23:05.880 --> 0:23:08.000
<v Speaker 6>Well, the thing is if you think about what Amazon,

0:23:08.080 --> 0:23:10.119
<v Speaker 6>Google and Microsoft had done and met to some extent,

0:23:10.119 --> 0:23:13.199
<v Speaker 6>but they're not selling compute capacity yet. Is they have

0:23:13.280 --> 0:23:16.440
<v Speaker 6>gone from being these cash heavy, these cash machines. They

0:23:16.520 --> 0:23:20.440
<v Speaker 6>just spill out money, low cash burn high revenue, low

0:23:20.520 --> 0:23:24.959
<v Speaker 6>assets into these bulbous GPU filled asset mongers who are

0:23:25.000 --> 0:23:28.200
<v Speaker 6>just full of these semi built data centers. For two

0:23:28.320 --> 0:23:31.800
<v Speaker 6>customers or three customers at best, so that they can

0:23:32.240 --> 0:23:34.560
<v Speaker 6>do what rent them out, so that they can rent

0:23:34.560 --> 0:23:37.040
<v Speaker 6>their models. And it isn't really clear what the plan

0:23:37.240 --> 0:23:39.600
<v Speaker 6>is at this point. And the problem is for me

0:23:39.720 --> 0:23:42.439
<v Speaker 6>to be right, it doesn't even have to go that badly.

0:23:42.880 --> 0:23:46.600
<v Speaker 6>Open AI and Anthropic have to grow so large to

0:23:46.680 --> 0:23:49.720
<v Speaker 6>be able to make all of this data center capacity good.

0:23:49.800 --> 0:23:52.960
<v Speaker 6>I mean, Google's i think the UBS estimate was like

0:23:53.000 --> 0:23:56.119
<v Speaker 6>seventy six billion dollars in twenty twenty seven of Google

0:23:56.160 --> 0:23:58.920
<v Speaker 6>Clouds revenue will come from Anthropic. How's Anthropic going to

0:23:58.960 --> 0:24:02.200
<v Speaker 6>afford that they burn ten billions of dollars? So it's

0:24:02.280 --> 0:24:05.000
<v Speaker 6>not just that these companies are unprofitable and unsustainable, but

0:24:05.040 --> 0:24:08.960
<v Speaker 6>they have to grow so very large to make AI

0:24:09.040 --> 0:24:12.439
<v Speaker 6>pay off because otherwise they just isn't demand for compute

0:24:12.480 --> 0:24:12.959
<v Speaker 6>at scale.

0:24:13.359 --> 0:24:15.520
<v Speaker 1>Last time you're on with us, we got a really

0:24:15.560 --> 0:24:18.119
<v Speaker 1>incredible response, to be honest, and a lot of people

0:24:18.119 --> 0:24:22.080
<v Speaker 1>who weren't typical viewers or listeners of our show saw

0:24:22.119 --> 0:24:23.919
<v Speaker 1>what you did and listened to what you did, and

0:24:24.000 --> 0:24:26.600
<v Speaker 1>it really seemed like there's this what you're saying is

0:24:26.640 --> 0:24:29.000
<v Speaker 1>resonating with a lot of people, like there's a It

0:24:29.040 --> 0:24:32.560
<v Speaker 1>was almost like there's this anti AI fervor that that's

0:24:32.600 --> 0:24:35.280
<v Speaker 1>out there, and I'm just curious why you think that is.

0:24:35.680 --> 0:24:38.600
<v Speaker 6>So I'm not sure it is anti AI, don't get

0:24:38.600 --> 0:24:42.160
<v Speaker 6>me wrong, but I think it's also anti financial shenanigans.

0:24:42.480 --> 0:24:45.400
<v Speaker 6>I think everyone sees the circular financing. I think they

0:24:45.480 --> 0:24:48.960
<v Speaker 6>see the Microsoft, Google and Amazon gets basically all of

0:24:49.000 --> 0:24:51.959
<v Speaker 6>their AI revenues either through products they're pushing on their

0:24:52.000 --> 0:24:55.080
<v Speaker 6>customers or indeed compute spend from anthropic and open AI.

0:24:55.680 --> 0:24:58.919
<v Speaker 6>And the average person's existence right now is so expensive,

0:24:59.280 --> 0:25:01.879
<v Speaker 6>so hard, so difficult. Getting a mortgage as a regular

0:25:01.920 --> 0:25:04.560
<v Speaker 6>person is so difficult. But if you're standing up a

0:25:04.600 --> 0:25:08.040
<v Speaker 6>theoretical data center in thirty six months full the Nvidia GPUs,

0:25:08.160 --> 0:25:10.240
<v Speaker 6>the banks fall over themselves to give you the money.

0:25:10.640 --> 0:25:13.360
<v Speaker 6>Or we've just raised what a nine percent bond, I mean,

0:25:13.680 --> 0:25:15.919
<v Speaker 6>you can raise anything if you have a data center.

0:25:16.000 --> 0:25:19.000
<v Speaker 6>And I think regular people can see that AI does

0:25:19.040 --> 0:25:22.760
<v Speaker 6>not deliver what people promise. They can see the opulence

0:25:22.760 --> 0:25:24.640
<v Speaker 6>of the people at the top of the AI industry,

0:25:24.720 --> 0:25:26.520
<v Speaker 6>and they can also see that they're being lied to

0:25:26.800 --> 0:25:29.679
<v Speaker 6>and being deliberately scared. On top of all of this

0:25:30.080 --> 0:25:32.480
<v Speaker 6>egregious circular financing, So.

0:25:32.520 --> 0:25:34.760
<v Speaker 3>You think people are actually lying.

0:25:34.640 --> 0:25:37.120
<v Speaker 6>Like or do you think people specifically?

0:25:37.160 --> 0:25:40.280
<v Speaker 3>I don't know, Like is it the companies at the hyperscalers,

0:25:40.280 --> 0:25:44.439
<v Speaker 3>the CEOs, the bankers, like do you think you know?

0:25:44.520 --> 0:25:47.320
<v Speaker 3>And to be fair, we really should reach out to everybody.

0:25:47.840 --> 0:25:51.280
<v Speaker 3>But I mean, is that what you're saying that or

0:25:51.320 --> 0:25:53.239
<v Speaker 3>do they or do they not really know?

0:25:53.640 --> 0:25:56.520
<v Speaker 6>I think they're overstating things. I think lying would suggest

0:25:56.520 --> 0:25:58.560
<v Speaker 6>the certain malice, what have you. I don't want to

0:25:58.560 --> 0:26:01.600
<v Speaker 6>accuse anyone of but I believe that they are massively

0:26:01.640 --> 0:26:04.600
<v Speaker 6>overstating what AI will do. You'll notice that AI people

0:26:04.800 --> 0:26:07.159
<v Speaker 6>tend to speak in the future tense. They tend not

0:26:07.240 --> 0:26:10.080
<v Speaker 6>to say, oh, well today it can It's always AI will,

0:26:10.200 --> 0:26:13.280
<v Speaker 6>AI will oh we're going to get the singularity, Oh

0:26:13.320 --> 0:26:15.560
<v Speaker 6>AI will do this and that. That's because when they

0:26:15.560 --> 0:26:18.840
<v Speaker 6>talk about what's happening today, it's pretty mediocre outside of code.

0:26:19.000 --> 0:26:22.080
<v Speaker 6>And on top of that, these things are horribly unsustainable

0:26:22.200 --> 0:26:24.120
<v Speaker 6>and unprofitable. And on top of that, they've got these

0:26:24.119 --> 0:26:28.320
<v Speaker 6>destructive data centers, these massive eye saws that poisoned black communities,

0:26:28.760 --> 0:26:31.320
<v Speaker 6>these massive eye saws that need billions of dollars at

0:26:31.320 --> 0:26:33.480
<v Speaker 6>a time when it's hard for a regular person to

0:26:33.480 --> 0:26:36.000
<v Speaker 6>get a dime from the banks. So yeah, I think

0:26:36.040 --> 0:26:39.640
<v Speaker 6>that there is beyond just the misleading, this general sense

0:26:39.640 --> 0:26:42.840
<v Speaker 6>of unfairness that AI taps into. And on top of that,

0:26:43.400 --> 0:26:46.800
<v Speaker 6>if this all goes pear shaped, these people are going

0:26:46.840 --> 0:26:49.680
<v Speaker 6>to realize that there was an authority crisis happening, that

0:26:49.800 --> 0:26:53.000
<v Speaker 6>so many people got beguiled by hyperscalar promises and what

0:26:53.080 --> 0:26:55.480
<v Speaker 6>it ultimately is. And I'm quoting ed Elson of profgy

0:26:55.520 --> 0:26:59.960
<v Speaker 6>markets here. Our media, I believe has a cult like

0:27:00.119 --> 0:27:02.679
<v Speaker 6>worship of the wealthy, that they believe that whatever the

0:27:02.720 --> 0:27:05.480
<v Speaker 6>wealthy says will come true. And in the past, with

0:27:05.520 --> 0:27:08.159
<v Speaker 6>the tech industry, that's kind of come true, except it

0:27:08.240 --> 0:27:10.760
<v Speaker 6>stopped really coming true about ten to eleven years ago

0:27:11.119 --> 0:27:13.960
<v Speaker 6>and we exited the era of hypergrowth. And that's all

0:27:14.000 --> 0:27:17.200
<v Speaker 6>AI is. AI is an attempt to restart hyper growth

0:27:17.200 --> 0:27:19.800
<v Speaker 6>for hyperscalers who don't have a new Google Search, who

0:27:19.880 --> 0:27:22.639
<v Speaker 6>don't have a new iPhone, and certainly do not have

0:27:22.720 --> 0:27:24.359
<v Speaker 6>a next Amazon Web Services.

0:27:24.880 --> 0:27:27.880
<v Speaker 3>You know, the conversation narrative is changing. Don't you think

0:27:27.920 --> 0:27:31.120
<v Speaker 3>it will continue to change? And it might be uncomfortable

0:27:31.240 --> 0:27:33.400
<v Speaker 3>in terms of how it plays out in financial markets.

0:27:33.600 --> 0:27:36.480
<v Speaker 6>Yes, I think this conversation is only going to accelerate.

0:27:36.600 --> 0:27:39.600
<v Speaker 6>Open Ai didn't cut prices because they found some mystical

0:27:39.640 --> 0:27:42.560
<v Speaker 6>way of making from things cheaper. It makes something eighty

0:27:42.560 --> 0:27:45.239
<v Speaker 6>percent cheaper. They saw the danger from China, and they

0:27:45.240 --> 0:27:47.680
<v Speaker 6>saw the competition from Anthropic, and they said, well, we're

0:27:47.680 --> 0:27:49.840
<v Speaker 6>allowed to burn billions of dollars, so why don't we

0:27:49.920 --> 0:27:52.280
<v Speaker 6>just cut prices and then make it up in volume

0:27:52.320 --> 0:27:55.520
<v Speaker 6>for an unprofitable product. I think the ROI conversation is

0:27:55.520 --> 0:27:58.600
<v Speaker 6>only going to accelerate too, because we should have really

0:27:58.600 --> 0:28:01.280
<v Speaker 6>had it years ago. We really should have had it immediately.

0:28:01.440 --> 0:28:04.600
<v Speaker 6>But again, people believe everything the tech industry says, and

0:28:04.640 --> 0:28:07.240
<v Speaker 6>they just thought, well, they wouldn't say this and be wrong,

0:28:07.280 --> 0:28:08.280
<v Speaker 6>would they were?

0:28:08.280 --> 0:28:11.640
<v Speaker 1>In your view, does Elon Musk and SpaceX fit into

0:28:11.640 --> 0:28:13.800
<v Speaker 1>this conversation. I bring it up because we learned this

0:28:13.880 --> 0:28:16.480
<v Speaker 1>afternoon that Elon Musk's net worth has fallen to six

0:28:16.560 --> 0:28:19.879
<v Speaker 1>hundred and eighty four billion dollars, which, yes, is a

0:28:19.920 --> 0:28:23.679
<v Speaker 1>lot of money. It has erase though the IPO gains

0:28:23.880 --> 0:28:26.480
<v Speaker 1>from SpaceX. And you we haven't been with you. You've

0:28:26.520 --> 0:28:31.840
<v Speaker 1>been on with us richest salary. Okay, you you haven't

0:28:31.880 --> 0:28:35.800
<v Speaker 1>joined US since SpaceX iPod, but there's a data point

0:28:35.800 --> 0:28:38.720
<v Speaker 1>there for at least in the short term reception to

0:28:39.440 --> 0:28:43.200
<v Speaker 1>a public company that has pretty significant exposure with AI.

0:28:43.560 --> 0:28:45.960
<v Speaker 6>Well, I think SpaceX is kind of the proof point

0:28:46.000 --> 0:28:48.840
<v Speaker 6>you need. We have someone who can sink unlimited capital

0:28:48.880 --> 0:28:51.880
<v Speaker 6>into this, who can hire anyone who can theoretically stand

0:28:51.960 --> 0:28:54.719
<v Speaker 6>up as much capacity as possible, breaking multiple laws at

0:28:54.720 --> 0:28:57.640
<v Speaker 6>the same time not getting the permits. And what did we.

0:28:57.600 --> 0:28:58.080
<v Speaker 5>Get for it?

0:28:58.080 --> 0:29:01.960
<v Speaker 6>We got groc and what grek. Well, it's a third, fourth,

0:29:02.080 --> 0:29:05.280
<v Speaker 6>fifth tier LLM that really only some people use by

0:29:05.320 --> 0:29:07.760
<v Speaker 6>accident when they turn on Twitter. So we have this

0:29:07.800 --> 0:29:10.960
<v Speaker 6>thing where we've had our third anthropic and open AI.

0:29:11.040 --> 0:29:13.719
<v Speaker 6>We've seen someone else try it. We've had what should

0:29:13.760 --> 0:29:17.640
<v Speaker 6>be the proof point that AI is an industry that

0:29:17.680 --> 0:29:20.040
<v Speaker 6>we can have many AI labs and oh, one thousand

0:29:20.120 --> 0:29:23.000
<v Speaker 6>flowers will bloom. And what we have is manure. We

0:29:23.080 --> 0:29:26.160
<v Speaker 6>have a company that loses billions of dollars to do what.

0:29:26.560 --> 0:29:27.160
<v Speaker 6>I don't know.

0:29:28.200 --> 0:29:30.680
<v Speaker 1>So should the US be in an arms race with

0:29:30.800 --> 0:29:31.840
<v Speaker 1>China for AI?

0:29:32.240 --> 0:29:35.120
<v Speaker 6>Oh? I think that the arms race with China in

0:29:35.200 --> 0:29:37.960
<v Speaker 6>and of itself is a marketing ploy. What oh no,

0:29:38.320 --> 0:29:41.080
<v Speaker 6>what's China going to do, make a cheaper and better LLM.

0:29:41.400 --> 0:29:45.440
<v Speaker 6>Oh it already happened, Nothing happened, Nothing happened China.

0:29:45.520 --> 0:29:48.960
<v Speaker 1>What about the security risks that these llms or these

0:29:49.160 --> 0:29:52.400
<v Speaker 1>these some of these agents are exposing, those from open

0:29:52.440 --> 0:29:54.160
<v Speaker 1>ai and those from Anthropic.

0:29:53.800 --> 0:29:55.760
<v Speaker 6>Well, I think the biggest risk with open ai and

0:29:55.760 --> 0:29:59.720
<v Speaker 6>Anthropics agents is they don't appear to do basic security practices.

0:30:00.040 --> 0:30:02.400
<v Speaker 6>They don't appear to take care of how they're using

0:30:02.400 --> 0:30:06.120
<v Speaker 6>their systems. Open Ai, say, I actually questioned this entire

0:30:06.160 --> 0:30:10.440
<v Speaker 6>story that their agent ran autonomously for multiple days, burning

0:30:10.480 --> 0:30:13.880
<v Speaker 6>what sounds like unlimited compute. Either this company has run

0:30:14.000 --> 0:30:16.680
<v Speaker 6>so terribly that they were running up millions of dollars

0:30:16.960 --> 0:30:20.320
<v Speaker 6>of bills to randomly do stuff, and also they don't

0:30:20.320 --> 0:30:22.640
<v Speaker 6>watch what it's doing. Software does what it's told to do.

0:30:22.680 --> 0:30:24.240
<v Speaker 6>We don't know the prompt, we don't know the training,

0:30:24.280 --> 0:30:25.400
<v Speaker 6>and they're not releasing the model.

0:30:25.440 --> 0:30:29.200
<v Speaker 1>But it doesn't change the fact that these agents reportedly

0:30:29.240 --> 0:30:35.280
<v Speaker 1>found weaknesses in code that if not exposed or that

0:30:35.600 --> 0:30:38.800
<v Speaker 1>could be vulnerable. Like what I'm saying is if there

0:30:38.840 --> 0:30:40.960
<v Speaker 1>is an idea that if this gets into the wrong hands,

0:30:41.520 --> 0:30:46.240
<v Speaker 1>then systems could break down, just very briefly.

0:30:45.920 --> 0:30:49.040
<v Speaker 6>One thing, it's already in the wrong hands, open and anthropic.

0:30:48.920 --> 0:30:51.560
<v Speaker 6>They've shown they do not have the responsibility to make

0:30:51.600 --> 0:30:53.960
<v Speaker 6>security tools. They should not be making them. They don't

0:30:53.960 --> 0:30:57.000
<v Speaker 6>know what they're doing. It's platantly obvious, and on top

0:30:57.040 --> 0:31:00.640
<v Speaker 6>of it, it's the brute force to hacking agent. They

0:31:00.840 --> 0:31:03.200
<v Speaker 6>shoved as much compute power into it as possible. You

0:31:03.200 --> 0:31:05.760
<v Speaker 6>could also pay hackers to do that. It's illegal. Also,

0:31:06.040 --> 0:31:09.040
<v Speaker 6>this all sounds illegal. I'm no lawyer, I'm no judge,

0:31:09.040 --> 0:31:11.360
<v Speaker 6>but I don't know why they're allowed to do this. Yeah,

0:31:11.480 --> 0:31:13.840
<v Speaker 6>these things are dangerous if they're allowed to be trained

0:31:13.840 --> 0:31:17.480
<v Speaker 6>on cybersecurity measures and execute against them. We I just

0:31:17.640 --> 0:31:20.680
<v Speaker 6>I find the whole thing repugnant because everyone is saying, oh,

0:31:20.720 --> 0:31:22.960
<v Speaker 6>look at the scary LM versus looking at the companies

0:31:23.000 --> 0:31:23.520
<v Speaker 6>that run out.

0:31:23.600 --> 0:31:25.640
<v Speaker 3>We got to run twenty seconds, anything that would change

0:31:25.640 --> 0:31:27.960
<v Speaker 3>your mind and make you say this is real, real quickly?

0:31:28.120 --> 0:31:33.160
<v Speaker 6>Not really? No, Okay, thank you, thank you.

0:31:33.080 --> 0:31:35.720
<v Speaker 3>Thank you, thank you. There's a lot of conversations this week,

0:31:35.760 --> 0:31:37.840
<v Speaker 3>and it was great to get your input at thank

0:31:37.880 --> 0:31:41.160
<v Speaker 3>you edit from his CEO Easy Primary Research. Right here

0:31:41.160 --> 0:31:46.680
<v Speaker 3>in our studio.

0:31:46.480 --> 0:31:50.479
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily podcast. Catch us

0:31:50.560 --> 0:31:54.000
<v Speaker 2>live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen

0:31:54.000 --> 0:31:57.520
<v Speaker 2>on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,

0:31:57.720 --> 0:32:00.200
<v Speaker 2>or watch us live on YouTube.

0:32:00.880 --> 0:32:05.840
<v Speaker 3>Former Open AI researcher Leopold Oshenbrenner's fund, Situational Awareness, was

0:32:05.960 --> 0:32:09.000
<v Speaker 3>riding high on a four hundred and thirty nine percent

0:32:09.080 --> 0:32:13.760
<v Speaker 3>return until a brutal July tech selloff triggered massive margin calls.

0:32:14.280 --> 0:32:16.680
<v Speaker 3>Ken Griffin came to the rescue, as he's wont to

0:32:16.720 --> 0:32:19.320
<v Speaker 3>do with beaten down assets, and snapped up some of

0:32:19.360 --> 0:32:20.880
<v Speaker 3>them at a discount.

0:32:21.240 --> 0:32:24.480
<v Speaker 1>Citadel's flagship fund surged five percent in July after the

0:32:24.520 --> 0:32:28.880
<v Speaker 1>firm bought most of Situational Awareness's public stocks at that discount,

0:32:29.120 --> 0:32:31.360
<v Speaker 1>and the transaction helped boost year to day gains at

0:32:31.360 --> 0:32:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Citadel to twelve percent. That's according to a person familiar

0:32:34.000 --> 0:32:34.560
<v Speaker 1>with the matter.

0:32:34.800 --> 0:32:37.560
<v Speaker 3>And then after all of that, and really to be

0:32:37.640 --> 0:32:41.520
<v Speaker 3>quite fair, just a few days after his hedge fund

0:32:41.520 --> 0:32:44.600
<v Speaker 3>came close to a collapse, Oshan Brenner is back in

0:32:44.640 --> 0:32:47.760
<v Speaker 3>the game, plunking down four hundred million dollars on a

0:32:47.760 --> 0:32:50.880
<v Speaker 3>privately held company, according to people familiar with the.

0:32:50.840 --> 0:32:53.600
<v Speaker 1>Matter, Bloomberg opinions. Aaron Brown knows a thing or two

0:32:53.640 --> 0:32:57.240
<v Speaker 1>about market risks. He's former chief risk manager at AQR

0:32:57.360 --> 0:33:01.560
<v Speaker 1>Capital Management, the hedge fund of cliff Usness. Aaron argues

0:33:01.560 --> 0:33:05.240
<v Speaker 1>that Situational Awareness's massive return was a quote warning, not

0:33:05.320 --> 0:33:06.440
<v Speaker 1>a triumph eron.

0:33:06.560 --> 0:33:09.200
<v Speaker 3>Nice to have you here with us, Welcome, Welcome. You

0:33:09.280 --> 0:33:11.800
<v Speaker 3>do know a thing or two about risk. You write

0:33:11.800 --> 0:33:13.920
<v Speaker 3>that math sets a speed limit on how fast a

0:33:14.000 --> 0:33:17.120
<v Speaker 3>portfolio can compound. What is that math? Take us to

0:33:17.160 --> 0:33:19.320
<v Speaker 3>Bell Labs and take us to nineteen fifty six.

0:33:21.200 --> 0:33:23.720
<v Speaker 5>Thank you for having me, Carol. Yeah, So this is

0:33:23.840 --> 0:33:27.640
<v Speaker 5>John Kelly from Bell Labs, a physicist, also a fighter

0:33:27.680 --> 0:33:33.600
<v Speaker 5>pilot and a bridge player. Really fascinating guy. And he

0:33:34.040 --> 0:33:39.400
<v Speaker 5>discovered that most people assume that taking more risk means

0:33:39.440 --> 0:33:42.960
<v Speaker 5>you increase the possibility of very good and very bad outcomes.

0:33:43.000 --> 0:33:46.280
<v Speaker 5>But what he discovered is there's a limit, and beyond that,

0:33:46.360 --> 0:33:49.120
<v Speaker 5>all you do is increase the probability of very bad

0:33:49.160 --> 0:33:54.520
<v Speaker 5>outcomes the Kelly point. And for those of you who

0:33:54.600 --> 0:33:57.960
<v Speaker 5>are familiar with his work, probably in gambling context or

0:33:57.960 --> 0:34:01.760
<v Speaker 5>investing context, the optim is half of the Kelly limit.

0:34:01.840 --> 0:34:04.360
<v Speaker 5>You know, you go halfway to the cliff, and that's

0:34:04.360 --> 0:34:07.360
<v Speaker 5>where you get your maximum growth four hundred and thirty

0:34:07.440 --> 0:34:12.080
<v Speaker 5>nine percent under any reasonable economics, any analysis. You know,

0:34:12.120 --> 0:34:16.040
<v Speaker 5>we only have partial information about situational awareness. We have

0:34:16.080 --> 0:34:18.160
<v Speaker 5>a thirteen a half from April that doesn't have the

0:34:18.200 --> 0:34:21.600
<v Speaker 5>shorts we have, you know, Wall Street Trader chatter, but

0:34:21.719 --> 0:34:26.200
<v Speaker 5>any reasonable suggestion says four hundred and thirty nine percent. Men,

0:34:26.280 --> 0:34:29.160
<v Speaker 5>they were well over the Kelly limit, meaning sooner or

0:34:29.200 --> 0:34:31.560
<v Speaker 5>later you have this happened to you, you blow up,

0:34:32.000 --> 0:34:34.160
<v Speaker 5>could be years, could be tomorrow.

0:34:34.600 --> 0:34:37.160
<v Speaker 1>Aaron the columns about such a situational awareness, but it's

0:34:37.160 --> 0:34:39.080
<v Speaker 1>also about the time period that we're in. Any reference,

0:34:39.080 --> 0:34:42.160
<v Speaker 1>what's happening in South Korea and specifically with some of

0:34:42.160 --> 0:34:45.400
<v Speaker 1>those celebrity tfs and the chip names there to you,

0:34:45.480 --> 0:34:48.840
<v Speaker 1>does this illustrate sort of where we are and maybe

0:34:49.000 --> 0:34:52.520
<v Speaker 1>a market cycle, a hype cycle. What does it tell you?

0:34:54.000 --> 0:34:59.239
<v Speaker 5>Well, it's I'm in an Ama Bolt myself, and you

0:34:59.280 --> 0:35:02.800
<v Speaker 5>know I have a some considerable investments in AI. Nothing

0:35:03.000 --> 0:35:06.880
<v Speaker 5>we're talking about today, it would affect that. But having

0:35:06.880 --> 0:35:09.400
<v Speaker 5>a long term vision that AI is going to be

0:35:09.520 --> 0:35:14.879
<v Speaker 5>very big doesn't give you a reason to take unlimited risk.

0:35:15.000 --> 0:35:18.400
<v Speaker 5>And whether we're talking about South Korean retail investors for

0:35:18.440 --> 0:35:22.920
<v Speaker 5>that matter, in New York retail investors or the Situational

0:35:22.960 --> 0:35:26.360
<v Speaker 5>Awareness Fund. You have to think about the long term.

0:35:26.400 --> 0:35:29.000
<v Speaker 5>You have to think about do I survive long enough

0:35:29.040 --> 0:35:30.480
<v Speaker 5>to collect on my debts?

0:35:32.200 --> 0:35:36.239
<v Speaker 3>So I have a question for you, you know, investment folks, right,

0:35:36.800 --> 0:35:41.640
<v Speaker 3>and companies often have you know, risk managers, and I

0:35:41.760 --> 0:35:46.319
<v Speaker 3>understand you know, so so laughing, am I wrong? Is

0:35:46.320 --> 0:35:49.399
<v Speaker 3>there not someone to say, Okay, you're in over your

0:35:49.440 --> 0:35:54.000
<v Speaker 3>skis here, you know, Like, so what's your read on

0:35:54.040 --> 0:35:56.759
<v Speaker 3>this this firm? I mean, it's still a ten billion

0:35:56.800 --> 0:36:00.279
<v Speaker 3>dollar hedge fund, so it's not like it's collapsed. Was

0:36:00.280 --> 0:36:02.200
<v Speaker 3>happy to take you know, but we understand that that's

0:36:02.200 --> 0:36:04.960
<v Speaker 3>what they do. But I don't know, like, how do

0:36:05.000 --> 0:36:07.840
<v Speaker 3>we kind of step back here in terms of internally

0:36:08.280 --> 0:36:10.319
<v Speaker 3>what this company is doing or this hedge fund is doing.

0:36:11.760 --> 0:36:14.640
<v Speaker 5>Okay, So Citadel has tremendous risk management as some of

0:36:14.640 --> 0:36:17.080
<v Speaker 5>the best risk management on the planet, which is why

0:36:17.160 --> 0:36:18.879
<v Speaker 5>they're in a position to do this kind of thing.

0:36:19.640 --> 0:36:22.680
<v Speaker 5>I don't know anybody at Situational Awareness, but the fact

0:36:22.760 --> 0:36:25.400
<v Speaker 5>that they had either four or seven I've seen different

0:36:25.440 --> 0:36:30.680
<v Speaker 5>media reports total financial professionals makes me suspect and plus

0:36:30.719 --> 0:36:33.680
<v Speaker 5>their investments make me suspect they did not have a

0:36:33.760 --> 0:36:36.080
<v Speaker 5>risk manager, or did not pay attention to him, or

0:36:36.080 --> 0:36:39.799
<v Speaker 5>did not have a qualified one, because there it just

0:36:40.120 --> 0:36:43.160
<v Speaker 5>does not seem like a risk managed portfolio. And all

0:36:43.200 --> 0:36:46.640
<v Speaker 5>of the public statements we've heard from them only mention

0:36:47.120 --> 0:36:52.719
<v Speaker 5>expected return, you know, future outcomes. None of it mentions risks. So, yes,

0:36:53.080 --> 0:36:56.799
<v Speaker 5>they should have had a better risk manager, and that

0:36:56.840 --> 0:36:59.719
<v Speaker 5>ten billion is that's pretty misleading. First of all, I

0:36:59.760 --> 0:37:02.960
<v Speaker 5>think that they're still carrying anthropic at five billion. I

0:37:03.000 --> 0:37:06.160
<v Speaker 5>don't think they've marked it down at all from its peak,

0:37:06.239 --> 0:37:10.160
<v Speaker 5>and it's certainly worth less than that. Second, you know,

0:37:10.200 --> 0:37:12.440
<v Speaker 5>they started the year at one point five billion. We

0:37:12.520 --> 0:37:16.960
<v Speaker 5>think they grew to well over you know, ten billion,

0:37:17.960 --> 0:37:21.880
<v Speaker 5>and so I suspect most of the investors in essay

0:37:22.160 --> 0:37:24.560
<v Speaker 5>on a dollar basis, have lost quite a bit of money.

0:37:24.760 --> 0:37:26.719
<v Speaker 5>If you were in January, you know, if you were

0:37:26.880 --> 0:37:29.160
<v Speaker 5>part of that one point five billion, you're still up

0:37:29.200 --> 0:37:32.160
<v Speaker 5>I think thirty percent for the year Wall Street Journal reported,

0:37:32.680 --> 0:37:35.480
<v Speaker 5>But most of the people got in closer to the

0:37:35.480 --> 0:37:38.200
<v Speaker 5>peak and are probably well underwater. Today.

0:37:39.280 --> 0:37:42.719
<v Speaker 1>We're speaking with Aaron Brown, columnists for Blooming Opinion, former

0:37:42.800 --> 0:37:46.000
<v Speaker 1>chief risk manager at AQR Capital Management, also the author

0:37:46.040 --> 0:37:48.200
<v Speaker 1>of Wrong Number, How to Extract Truth from a Blizzard

0:37:48.200 --> 0:37:50.680
<v Speaker 1>of Quantitative Disinformation. I like that you brought up that

0:37:50.719 --> 0:37:53.080
<v Speaker 1>private stake Anthropic because I don't want to give the

0:37:53.080 --> 0:37:55.840
<v Speaker 1>whole column away, but you and I encourage everybody to

0:37:55.880 --> 0:37:57.200
<v Speaker 1>go read it. I was just sending it around to

0:37:57.239 --> 0:38:00.440
<v Speaker 1>some guests who've joined us in the past. You make

0:38:00.480 --> 0:38:03.160
<v Speaker 1>the point that the anthropic investment, like it makes sense

0:38:03.200 --> 0:38:06.279
<v Speaker 1>they still have that because they couldn't They couldn't take

0:38:06.360 --> 0:38:11.640
<v Speaker 1>margin on that. They can't transfer shares of that, so

0:38:11.680 --> 0:38:13.839
<v Speaker 1>it's like, at the end of the day, it's sort

0:38:13.880 --> 0:38:16.799
<v Speaker 1>of the safest thing for them because they couldn't bet

0:38:16.840 --> 0:38:17.319
<v Speaker 1>against it.

0:38:19.280 --> 0:38:22.640
<v Speaker 5>Well, oh, well, they can't lever it. There are people

0:38:22.680 --> 0:38:25.240
<v Speaker 5>who will lend you money against it, but they won't.

0:38:25.600 --> 0:38:27.839
<v Speaker 5>They're not daily margins, so you're not getting the kind

0:38:27.840 --> 0:38:31.240
<v Speaker 5>of leverage they out of public investments. And it's possible

0:38:31.360 --> 0:38:33.319
<v Speaker 5>that they didn't lever it at all. I guess is

0:38:33.360 --> 0:38:35.879
<v Speaker 5>they didn't. You know, if you have public stock, you're

0:38:35.880 --> 0:38:38.520
<v Speaker 5>going to lever those. You don't have to go to

0:38:38.560 --> 0:38:42.799
<v Speaker 5>your private But yes, a company like Situational Awareness, with

0:38:42.880 --> 0:38:45.320
<v Speaker 5>their approach to the market they should be making private

0:38:45.360 --> 0:38:47.239
<v Speaker 5>investments and not levering them.

0:38:48.680 --> 0:38:50.719
<v Speaker 3>What about the banks that were lending the money, Like,

0:38:50.800 --> 0:38:54.600
<v Speaker 3>what's the due diligence on that? And they were well

0:38:54.640 --> 0:38:59.400
<v Speaker 3>known banks we keep citing like JP Morgan. I'm just

0:38:59.440 --> 0:39:02.800
<v Speaker 3>curious how that typically works out.

0:39:03.680 --> 0:39:05.839
<v Speaker 5>Well, it typically works out like this one. Did they

0:39:05.840 --> 0:39:07.279
<v Speaker 5>get all their money better? Yeah?

0:39:07.560 --> 0:39:10.000
<v Speaker 3>Okay, you know, but the due diligence ahead of it?

0:39:10.120 --> 0:39:13.080
<v Speaker 3>Aaron like, do they just is there something that they

0:39:13.120 --> 0:39:17.560
<v Speaker 3>look at ahead of it in terms of yeah.

0:39:17.200 --> 0:39:22.520
<v Speaker 5>Yes, yes, they do that very carefully. And Archid Ghost

0:39:22.880 --> 0:39:24.440
<v Speaker 5>was you know, a couple of years ago. That was

0:39:24.480 --> 0:39:27.760
<v Speaker 5>the exception. That was where they all got burned because

0:39:27.800 --> 0:39:30.600
<v Speaker 5>they went ahead over to their skis, as you put it,

0:39:31.520 --> 0:39:35.120
<v Speaker 5>they they went, this is exactly how it is supposed

0:39:35.120 --> 0:39:38.640
<v Speaker 5>to work. The banks always should do, okay. And what

0:39:38.760 --> 0:39:40.320
<v Speaker 5>they were looking at is they were looking at the

0:39:40.400 --> 0:39:43.400
<v Speaker 5>market for the stock they were. They knew Citadel was around,

0:39:43.400 --> 0:39:45.880
<v Speaker 5>they knew there were other people around who would you know,

0:39:46.000 --> 0:39:47.800
<v Speaker 5>be in a position to buy on a dip. And

0:39:48.000 --> 0:39:52.640
<v Speaker 5>they quickly got out, you know, before before they got hurt.

0:39:52.920 --> 0:39:55.000
<v Speaker 5>And and as they say, that's how it's supposed to work,

0:39:55.000 --> 0:39:57.359
<v Speaker 5>and that's how it usually does work. That's why these

0:39:57.400 --> 0:39:58.680
<v Speaker 5>companies are so big and rich.

0:39:58.920 --> 0:40:00.840
<v Speaker 1>But you also make the point in piece that Citadel

0:40:00.920 --> 0:40:03.279
<v Speaker 1>learned this lesson the hard way, like they're looked at

0:40:03.400 --> 0:40:06.040
<v Speaker 1>right now, is coming and swooping in at this time,

0:40:06.200 --> 0:40:10.840
<v Speaker 1>but post two thousand and eight they suffered some serious losses.

0:40:11.560 --> 0:40:15.480
<v Speaker 5>And HR in two thousand and seven did as well. Yeah,

0:40:15.560 --> 0:40:20.400
<v Speaker 5>so yes, risk management is a lot of unhappy experience,

0:40:20.520 --> 0:40:21.880
<v Speaker 5>but learning from experience.

0:40:22.440 --> 0:40:26.839
<v Speaker 1>So okay, So hindsight is twenty twenty if this if

0:40:26.920 --> 0:40:30.719
<v Speaker 1>this portfolio, and again we don't have complete information, like

0:40:30.800 --> 0:40:33.320
<v Speaker 1>you said, this is based around what has leaked in

0:40:33.640 --> 0:40:36.759
<v Speaker 1>thirteen f's, but what would have been the right way

0:40:37.840 --> 0:40:42.080
<v Speaker 1>to build positions in companies that you believe in that

0:40:42.400 --> 0:40:45.960
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't have overexposed them on the downside?

0:40:47.440 --> 0:40:51.440
<v Speaker 5>Well okay, so situational awareness. The investment thesis is that

0:40:51.719 --> 0:40:56.160
<v Speaker 5>AI is going to be giantic is going to you know,

0:40:57.239 --> 0:40:59.080
<v Speaker 5>take over the world, but it's going to be bigger

0:40:59.160 --> 0:41:02.279
<v Speaker 5>than even most of the optimists think. But it has

0:41:02.360 --> 0:41:04.800
<v Speaker 5>no thesis at least as twenty of the public statements

0:41:04.800 --> 0:41:07.000
<v Speaker 5>about the path to getting there. So you have to

0:41:07.080 --> 0:41:09.040
<v Speaker 5>think about that through and say, what are the scenarios

0:41:09.360 --> 0:41:12.520
<v Speaker 5>where we're right but we don't get to keep our positions.

0:41:13.480 --> 0:41:15.960
<v Speaker 5>It also has I think people are not aware of

0:41:16.040 --> 0:41:18.640
<v Speaker 5>how complex its positions are. Again, this is looking at

0:41:18.680 --> 0:41:20.919
<v Speaker 5>the thirteen F without the shorts, but we can see

0:41:21.080 --> 0:41:24.000
<v Speaker 5>they're betting against a lot of these companies. They're picking

0:41:24.080 --> 0:41:26.920
<v Speaker 5>and choosing, and so they've got longs and shorts, and

0:41:27.160 --> 0:41:29.720
<v Speaker 5>they've got a lot of puts on. So they're betting

0:41:29.920 --> 0:41:32.520
<v Speaker 5>certain segments will do well and others are going to

0:41:32.600 --> 0:41:35.839
<v Speaker 5>get beaten out. So this is a very complex bet.

0:41:36.320 --> 0:41:38.320
<v Speaker 5>So you have to think, Okay, what's the situation in

0:41:38.400 --> 0:41:42.120
<v Speaker 5>which we're right, but what's the worst point between now

0:41:42.200 --> 0:41:45.720
<v Speaker 5>and then? And can we survive it? It doesn't appear

0:41:45.800 --> 0:41:48.160
<v Speaker 5>to me that they were asking that question, or they weren't,

0:41:48.320 --> 0:41:49.799
<v Speaker 5>you know, taking it seriously enough.

0:41:50.760 --> 0:41:52.839
<v Speaker 3>I want to wrap up with you know, you said

0:41:53.000 --> 0:41:55.400
<v Speaker 3>earlier Erin that you are an eyeball and you have

0:41:55.520 --> 0:42:01.480
<v Speaker 3>positions situational awareness to figure out is this kind of

0:42:01.520 --> 0:42:03.520
<v Speaker 3>maybe a coal in the Canary mine when it comes

0:42:03.600 --> 0:42:06.000
<v Speaker 3>to the AI trade and narrative? What would you say?

0:42:06.160 --> 0:42:10.839
<v Speaker 5>It's not? No, No, I don't think so. I mean,

0:42:10.960 --> 0:42:12.920
<v Speaker 5>you know, we had to pull back an AI, and

0:42:13.480 --> 0:42:15.160
<v Speaker 5>you know, a lot of people got hurt, but really

0:42:15.280 --> 0:42:19.840
<v Speaker 5>the only headlines disasters are the people who were over levered,

0:42:19.880 --> 0:42:23.759
<v Speaker 5>either the EKF source situational awareness. Most of the investors

0:42:23.800 --> 0:42:25.560
<v Speaker 5>are there for the long term. You know, you don't

0:42:25.600 --> 0:42:28.000
<v Speaker 5>see a huge sell off. I don't see anybody changing

0:42:28.040 --> 0:42:31.600
<v Speaker 5>their mind about AI. You had to expect. I mean,

0:42:31.680 --> 0:42:34.320
<v Speaker 5>I mean, these stocks are extremely volatile, and the events

0:42:34.360 --> 0:42:36.360
<v Speaker 5>of the summer have been you know, pretty much normal

0:42:36.480 --> 0:42:40.680
<v Speaker 5>volativity for the sector. So if you were investing sensibly

0:42:40.760 --> 0:42:44.120
<v Speaker 5>in AI, this summer was not an unpleasant experience for you.

0:42:45.160 --> 0:42:46.520
<v Speaker 3>We're going to leave it on that note. We're so

0:42:46.640 --> 0:42:49.360
<v Speaker 3>glad we could get you on. We read your column

0:42:49.400 --> 0:42:52.040
<v Speaker 3>and thought it was super super smart and just a

0:42:52.080 --> 0:42:54.920
<v Speaker 3>different take, and it was something we wanted to bring

0:42:55.000 --> 0:42:56.359
<v Speaker 3>to our viewers and our listeners erin.

0:42:56.400 --> 0:42:56.920
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much.

0:42:56.920 --> 0:43:00.840
<v Speaker 3>I hope you'll come back. Thank you well, Okay, good stuff.

0:43:01.040 --> 0:43:04.200
<v Speaker 3>Aaron Brown, columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, former chief ust manager

0:43:04.200 --> 0:43:07.520
<v Speaker 3>at AQR Capital Management, whose book Wrong Number.

0:43:07.680 --> 0:43:09.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm glad he said he'd come back, because if he

0:43:10.000 --> 0:43:11.520
<v Speaker 1>would have said I'm not going to come back.

0:43:11.440 --> 0:43:12.560
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I guess, I guess it wouldn't have been.

0:43:12.600 --> 0:43:13.080
<v Speaker 5>It wouldn't have been.

0:43:13.760 --> 0:43:14.440
<v Speaker 3>That's so fair.

0:43:14.600 --> 0:43:15.640
<v Speaker 1>No, it's a good strategy.

0:43:16.320 --> 0:43:16.719
<v Speaker 5>I like it.

0:43:16.840 --> 0:43:18.080
<v Speaker 1>Now, we're going to hold it to it and we're

0:43:18.080 --> 0:43:19.360
<v Speaker 1>going to get him on for our next column.

0:43:19.760 --> 0:43:21.120
<v Speaker 3>It's a story like we're still trying to be.

0:43:24.800 --> 0:43:30.120
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,

0:43:30.280 --> 0:43:34.000
<v Speaker 2>and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday

0:43:34.040 --> 0:43:37.759
<v Speaker 2>afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,

0:43:38.080 --> 0:43:41.959
<v Speaker 2>the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:43:42.239 --> 0:43:45.000
<v Speaker 2>You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube

0:43:45.239 --> 0:43:47.360
<v Speaker 2>and always on the Bloomberg terminal