AI, you’ve done it to me.
Even when
eliminating most of the news items about it, those focusing on the future
instead of the present and on other factors irrelevant to what is happening
with the technology itself, there are too many for even weekly posts. So I have divided it into subtopics, of which
this is the first to get publication.
The oldest
here is “Microsoft’s Steep AI Investments Raise Questions About Returns”
(Patrick Seitz, Investor’s Business Daily, July 10th). As crisply put by a Morgan Stanley analyst, “with
Microsoft’s capital expenditures poised to nearly double from $32 billion in
fiscal 2023 to our forecasted $63 billion in fiscal 2025, the question of
monetization against these investments rises to the forefront for many
investors.” The analyst still rated the
stock highly, but, per the author, “after digging into the question of return
on investment,” “was left with more questions than answers” because of a “lack
of visibility.”
The first
item in the July 19th Goldman Sachs Briefings was “Will the
$1 trillion in AI spending pay off?.” The
determination here was “AI may prove far less promising than many business
leaders and investors expect,” per an MIT professor who “estimates that only a
quarter of AI-exposed tasks will be cost-effective to automate within the next
10 years – which means that AI will impact less than 5% of all tasks and boost
US productivity by only 0.5% and GDP growth by 0.9% cumulatively over the next
decade.” A Goldman Sachs research head
went “a step further” by saying that “there’s not a single thing that this is
being used for that’s cost-effective at this point.”
On the other
hand, “Alphabet Reports 20% Jump in Profit as A.I. Efforts Begin to Pay Off”
(Nico Grant, The New York Times, July 23rd). “The company has incorporated generative A.I.
into all of its products and increased its spending on data centers and
associated hardware to underpin the technology.
Now, Google executives said, those investments have started to bear
fruit,” with second-quarter profit of $23.6 billion. However, Victor Tangermann, in “Investors Are
Suddenly Getting Very Concerned That AI Isn’t Making Any Serious Money” in Futurism.com
on July 27th, reported that “investment bankers are… starting to
become wary of Big Tech’s ability to actually turn the tech into a profitable
business," saying that Google’s earning report was “failing to impress
investors with razor-thin profit margins and surging costs related to training
AI models.” Still pertinently, a “tech
stock analyst” wrote back in March that “capital continues to pour into the AI
sector with very little attention being paid to company fundamentals… a sure
sign that when the music stops there will not be many chairs available.”
Perhaps in
reaction to these pieces and the thoughts behind them, “Tech Bosses Preach
Patience as They Spend and Spend on A.I.” (Karen Weise, The New York Times,
August 2nd). “The tech
industry’s biggest companies have made it clear over the last week that they
have no intention of throttling their stunning levels of spending on artificial
intelligence, even though investors are getting worried that a big payoff is
further down the line than once thought.”
On a week ago Thursday, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta said he would spend “at
least $37 billion” on “new tech infrastructure,” and “would spend even more
next year.” “In the last quarter alone,
Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google’s parent company Alphabet spent a
combined $59 billion on capital expenses, 63 percent more than a year earlier
and 161 percent more than four years ago.”
Another Goldman Sachs executive asked “What $1 trillion problem with
A.I. solve?,” and implied that “replacing low wage jobs with tremendously
costly technology” was not sufficient justification. Yet leaders of the other largest IT firms
also emphasized the need to be at the front of AI progress, and that true
business success there might take a long time.
Is it true
that “The AI supply chain is in jeopardy” (Guy Scriven, The Economist,
August 3rd)? “About a year
ago,” he “started to ask analysts what it would take to stop the… (AI) bull
run. Most suggested it would end if big
tech firms failed to deliver meaningful AI-related sales for a couple of
quarters in a row. It took more than a
couple of quarters, but over the past two weeks, as the tech giants reported
their earnings, that scenario has started to play out.” Adding to general murkiness is that Microsoft,
where “growth in this revenue stream has been slowing,” “is still the only big
tech firm that puts a figure to its AI sales.”
He echoed that “scepticism has set in among investors,” and opined that
“the boom looks somewhat precarious,” as “the larger risk is that demand peters
out.”
Will it, or
won’t it?
No comments:
Post a Comment