저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 빅테크는 혁신 정점을 지나 현금 cow 단계로 진입했고, 금리 인하 전까지 성장 기대는 제한적이라는 견해. 구글 리더십: 순다르 피차이는 충분히 유능하며, 리더십 교체 논란은 과도하다고 봄. 이사회가 인원 15~20% 감축 같은 단순 조치를 취하면 충분하다는 입장. 빅테크 혁신 정체: 애플(2007 아이폰), 마이크로소프트(1990년대), 구글(1998 검색), 페이스북(2000년대 핵심 서비스) 이후 파괴적 혁신이 거의 없었다고 주장. 최근 VR 투자 등은 자본 误배분 사례. 재무공학: 빅테크는 저금리 차입으로 자사주 매입, EPS 조작 등 재무공학에 집중. 페이스북은 연초 대비 90% 상승한 만큼 이 게임은 당분간 유효하다고 언급. 금리 및 Fed: 연준은 데이터 반응이 느리며, 핵심 수단은 통화량 조절. 유동성 확대 시 자산가격 상승·인플레 상승, 축소 시 자산가격 하락·인플레 하락. 노동시장과 인플레: 중국 중심 세계 질서 종료로 리쇼어링·니어쇼어링이 늘어 비용과 인플레 상승 압력. 노동 협상력이 강해져 임금 상승 압력. 반면 AI는 지식노동 비용을 크게 낮춰 디플레이션 요인으로 작용. AI와 서비스업: 법률 AI 하비(Harvey) 투자 사례를 들어, 컨설팅·법률·회계 등 지식서비스 업무 비용이 AI로 하락할 것으로 전망. 프라이스워터하우스쿠퍼스의 AI 투자도 언급. 출연자 전망: 빅테크 밸류에이션은 현금흐름 때문에 당분간 상승 가능하나 성장 투자처로는 적합하지 않다는 입장.
다듬은 글
what are your thoughts on Google's leadership specifically is Sundar the right person to run the company going forward does he have the founder authority to get the ship and to get the lieutenants all kind of rowing in the same direction does there need to be a leadership change which is the big discussion of Topic in Silicon Valley right now I think he's very capable that's an amorphous organization of so many different competing interests the thing that doesn't add up about the Google earnings release but then also what Freebird just mentioned is there was this article that kind of tried to paint Sundar as sort of a caretaker CEO right where Larry was the actual Shadow CEO well if that's true you know Larry has more incentive than anybody else to kind of force change and there was all these kind of like gripes and complaints that were articulated and I don't put much stock in all of this stuff I think that he is the right person for the job and I think what they have to do is just do the simple basic things like it doesn't take a CEO change for a board of directors to have the emotional wherewithal to authorize a 15 or 20 reduction in force for a company that is so profitable that clearly is not yet humming on all cylinders and so you don't need to go through all of this drastic change to do these simple obvious things my takeaway across all of these four big companies is we are in a really unique moment to observe something that may sound controversial or hurt people's feelings that like these companies but I think we're now well past Peak big Tech their valuations may still go up because they generate such an enormous amount of cash flow but these are exactly those kinds of businesses now they are X growth large cash flow businesses if you look at Google Facebook Microsoft and Apple and ask yourself when was the last hugely disruptive thing that they've created you're hard-pressed to find something that was even done in the 2010s iPhone was 2007.
Microsoft was in the 1990s Google was in 1998 with course search maybe there was maps and Gmail in the 2000s the Facebook it was the core service that we built in the 2000s and then they acquired brilliantly right so I'm not saying that they didn't acquire well my point is that core organic Innovation hasn't been there for a long time so this is a moment to just be reflective of the fact that these are some incredible companies with ginormous cash flows but now you've had this foundational platform shift which exposes the fact that they really aren't good at innovating and at times when they've tried to organically innovate they've massively misallocated Capital either through a bloated balance sheet so some claim that Google overspends or through just pure misallocation by starting projects that just are not large but consume large amounts of cash that would be the Facebook VR example but in all of this I think when you cut staff and expenses as a way to meet and beat and Top Line growth is in the low single digits it's an important moment to recognize that these companies have now transitioned to being cash cows and if you look at sort of how financial markets value cash cows they're very valuable but it's not where you look for growth and so in a world where rates eventually get cut and we start to come out of a recession it tends to be that other people get rewarded so that's an idea it's adding to your point here they're not allowed to acquire these microsofts they're not going to be allowed to buy stuff so then you're right what is the growth here they're not able to innovate I think these companies are X growth which is why they use their cash flows to do what borrow money cheaply to buy back stock to manipulate their Equity right you can manipulate and overcome dilution you can manipulate earnings per share you can manipulate the number of shares outstanding and so just by the nature of that whole game a bunch of passive investors will end up buying more which helps the active investors who own that stock so it's a game so if we're not in the world we're in the financial engineering phase which is fine and by the way you can make a lot of money Facebook's up 90 so there's a lot of meaning just this year so there's a lot of room for financial engineering but it's not where you need to look to figure out where these big improvements and uses of this next Generation platform technology are going to come from most likely what do you think about the employment and participation situation and how that might unlock things I also wanted to know from YouTube this concept of the FED is reacting to data just so slowly and then you have these companies that maybe are more Nimble and they have better data than the FED I think that that's a truism and I don't think anything about that is going to change I mean I think we talked about how these folks calculate non-farm payrolls or how they calculate CPI it's incredibly outdated right it's people with clipboards walking around talking to people and checking boxes and filling out forms can that change probably it could will it change it probably won't and so they're going to focus on the most simple but most powerful measure that they have which is controlling the money supply kind of what sax talked about so they're going to manipulate the money supply to either put more liquidity in the system in which case markets go up and asset prices go up but then inflation goes up or constrained liquidity which then causes markets to go down asset prices to go down and inflation eventually to go down the thing that we're facing today when you look at this labor market chart is a couple of things that I we've talked about before and I just want to reiterate them which is you have to remember that we are in this new world order which is the ex-china World Order and in that there is no more unitary economy that can do things cheaper faster and better globally around the world right so we're going to near shore or onshore all kinds of things that used to be done by the Chinese they'll sit in Mexico or they'll sit in Central America maybe in some cases they'll sit in Canada and all of that will feed into the United States the problem with all of that is that that will keep costs higher because it'll be naturally more inefficient it will naturally take more money and that will naturally cause the prices of those things to be higher which means that terminal inflation I think is just roughly higher as a result I think that more power if you will goes to labor so in this constant tension that we have in an economy between labor and capital the people that own the factories or the businesses and the people that run them and work inside of them we've been in this position where the pendulum has swung so far towards capitals the owners the shareholders that all this Financial engineering has tremendous upside right that's why companies engage in it but when you show that chart Jason what it means is it's just really hard to find people and so the only way you're going to get people off their butt to go into work to sit in a chair to do a job that you need them to do is to pay them more and in finding that wages will have to go up the counterbalance of that is what AI will do which I think I have to say that is the key which is massively deflationary so that is going to be the tension that we're in now for a really long time as we explore this I don't know if you guys saw today but Sequoia led a 20 million dollar round in this thing called harvey.ai which is like a legal super wizard for law firms and my partners and I were debating it and what we thought of was well how much do you pay out of the 800 or thousand dollars an hour that you charge to harvey.i maybe you're willing to pay five percent or ten percent but then the reality is that one of the powerful things it does is able to go into Westlaw find all these cases and say yeah this is germane to the thing that you're working on right now that's a very useful thing but the N plus First Law Firm will also use that tool and instead of charging 800 an hour they'll say well we'll charge 600 bucks an hour and we're still willing to give you five or ten percent so I just don't see a world where on the one hand physical labor will continue to be more expensive they'll demand more and more money to do the job that they're asked to do and the knowledge work will become increasingly more deflationary because so much of it will be automated by AI that those folks will charge less and less and there's going to be attention there and I don't exactly know what's going to happen we said that the first organizations to use this like the canary and the coal mine would be the Consulting organizations and today when Harvey got announced one of the things that that right on the heels of that pricewaterhousecoopers announced like a billion dollar investment into neon which makes sense because as a Consulting organization full of lawyers and accountants and I.T folks those are the services jobs that you get tremendous Leverage if you were to use these tools
Comments 0