원문 보기
Rather at the expense. Yeah, I just want to say, I was incredibly optimistic about Lily, as I have been for a long time, and I still am. I don't think this lawsuit from Novo is anything serious. If they believe their product is truly better than Lily's, my advice as someone who owns shares for an investment trust is to prove it.
Make a direct comparison with Lily. Because that's exactly what they did. I'm looking at an article in the New England Journal of Medicine that came out not too long ago, and that's what they were referring to; Lily's ad is taken directly from the New England Journal of Medicine. So I don't really understand what Novo is expecting, but I like the New England Journal of Medicine as a source .
Yes. It seems like you think this might be an attempt to divert attention. No. Yes. From Novo. I think so. Look, I just think there's a way to make a direct comparison. But if all Lily does is cite the New England Journal of Medicine, then that's a very reputable organization. It's hard to go against them.
I haven't seen them make any mistakes in 40 years. Yes, they are that good. Well, look at the difference in stock price over three years. Jim, it wasn't a very even fight, although the other day a magazine tried to prove that there might be some advantages to producing Novo tablets. Listen, the Novo pill was the leader.
In fact, Lily's performance showed good growth last week. This will be a fierce fight that will last a very long time. But I really think the ultimate winner will be the company that has a pill that allows you to lose fat, not muscle. Nobody has it yet. This is available on the "gray" market. I don't want to talk about it anymore because I know it can be obtained.
But the fact is that Eli Lily has the capacity to produce everything they need, and Novo doesn't have that kind of budget. Ultimately, it all comes down to infrastructure. Lily has better infrastructure , but I don't know about science . New England Journal of Medicine, thank you. Are you starting to see signals that the long-term health impact , the positive impact, is starting to become apparent?
You know, I didn't recommend Abbott Labs before they had a better quarter, just because they're in diabetes, and I'm very concerned that if one in ten Americans is taking these drugs, what's going to happen to the world, because diabetes is what Abbott really makes money on. Yes. I still think Abbott had the better quarter, and it's good that we got through this acquisition.
That's right. Yes. I'll tell you, yes, I'm concerned. Medicare provides this for very little money. And I think what's happened is that a lot of the diseases that these drugs are targeting are diseases that other companies have made a lot of money on, and they're not going to make as much money anymore.
Yes. This reminds me of those times. That was a long time ago. Maybe it was the BFA report on these new things called GLP-1 and how they would affect air travel due to less fuel consumption. Clothing sizes . It was an absolute peak. Remember this? Yes. It was "buy the airlines" because people will weigh less.
It was, you know , it was, well, no, it didn't work. By the way, at Kraft Heinz, Kane made a deal with Disney. Don't write this guy off. He understands how good a business Heinz is. But yes, these actions were simply unbearable. Lily fell to seven. Wait until it drops to 10. There will be people who love Lily so much .
I got the idea for Lily from Ken Landon. Oh, exactly. He said a thousand, right? 400. You said Jim Ely would be... That was a good prediction Ken. from ARM this week about what they are doing to see the conclusion at the CPU level. I think this is a rising tide scenario that lifts all boats. This is a classic Jevons paradox, as we see more and more demand.
We will see more and more demand in everything. Will Nvidia retain over 90% of its GPU market share? I think it will decrease over time. But do I see this as having a negative impact on the overall demand for the platform? Absolutely not. How much do you think Jensen Huang will touch on the issue of depreciation and cyclical financing?
Do you think this will play a big role or take center stage in discussions? I don't think he'll touch on this in the main discussion of the issues, but I can't imagine that stock analysts will leave him alone so easily. So I will listen to the comments. He's definitely, he's definitely going to get, he's definitely going to get questions about this.
I think some of the financial transactions for that 500 billion, we're already seeing GPUs becoming collateral assets. So, we're starting to see some NeoClouds, like Cumulus AI CEO Mike Maniscalo, looking for innovative ways to fund and implement these systems. So I think everyone is starting to realize that this is a huge scale of development.
We have development commitments amounting, as I said, to 800 billion. So I think we're still at the very beginning. How long have we been in this process for 3 years? I think we're talking about a 10-15 year trend, and we see this build-up and focus on how to finance it, so it won't avoid these questions.
And since he won't avoid questions, Stephen, I mean, I'm reviewing what I 've read, a bunch of notes today, a lot of announcements, and so many of them mention the importance of looking at Vera Rubin and scaling Vera Rubin. But I think just a moment ago we were talking about Blackwell. So how important is Blackwell to the big picture compared to any comments about Vera Rubin?
It looks as if the market may be looking past Blackwell and demanding some visibility and evidence that the uptrend cycle will continue beyond '27. What are your thoughts on this and the conversations you've had? How do people view Blackwell v. Rubin and their importance in the report? Well, for me, Marley, it's the speed of innovation.
Nvidia brings new systems to market almost every year. When you compare this to other GPU and semiconductor vendors, it's unheard of. So, but I don't think Before we get to the Nvidia updates, subscribe to our channel because what Nvidia just revealed could change the way investors view the whole AI boom.
Nvidia just provided a number that is almost impossible to ignore. Revenue growth of 17 %, and this is not just a tiny startup promising explosive growth. We're talking about Nvidia, , which says it can continue to grow at an extraordinary pace in 2027. So what's behind this confidence? The answer is simple.
Demand for AI still outpaces supply. Companies have no problem finding reasons to buy Nvidia technology. They are trying to get because AI is no longer just about training models. The use of inference is growing rapidly. As AI models become more complex and the number of people using AI applications increases, the number of tokens being created is constantly increasing.
Even if the price of each token continues to fall, the total number of users can grow much faster. Think of it this way: AI compute is getting cheaper per unit, but the amount of compute consumption continues to grow, and this creates a massive infrastructure cycle. And Nvidia is right at the center of it.
But there is another part of this story that investors cannot ignore: supply. To support the system, a huge amount of memory, wafers, networking components, and other semiconductor infrastructure is required. Memory is particularly important, as high-speed memory has become one of the critical bottlenecks in modern AI systems.
That's why Nvidia is willing to use its balance sheet to support part of the ecosystem. This is not necessarily due to a lack of demand at Nvidia, but rather because some smaller AI infrastructure companies have demand but lack the financial capacity to scale quickly. Nvidia can help address this bottleneck by potentially creating more demand for its own technology, and this is where the company's balance sheet becomes more than just numbers on the balance sheet.
It becomes a tool of competition. Important changes are also occurring on the customer side . Nvidia is gradually becoming less dependent on giant hyperscalers alone. So regional AI projects, enterprises, and , which may reduce customer concentration over time. But investors still have a major issue—competition .
Google builds its own chips, while Amazon develops specialized semiconductors. Microsoft is also investing in alternative solutions. AMD continues to promote its AI accelerators. So why is n't Nvidia losing ground? Because the artificial intelligence market itself is expanding extremely rapidly. Even if Nvidia eventually loses some market share, the overall market could become so large that Nvidia's revenue would continue to grow rapidly.
And there is another weapon that Nvidia has. This is its ecosystem. CUDA software, networking systems, and the huge developer base around the Nvidia platform make switching to another solution much more difficult than simply buying another chip.
Comments 0