GS Reddit Mentions | ChartExchange

Oh, so Wall Street "analysts" er, stock salesmen, say "Nothing to see here, all is fine" as they keep pumping Goldman Sachs AI clients bonds and stocks to rake in those fat commissions for Goldman Sachs.

[https://www.goldmansachs.com/pdfs/insights/goldman-sachs-research/ai-in-a-bubble/report.pdf](https://www.goldmansachs.com/pdfs/insights/goldman-sachs-research/ai-in-a-bubble/report.pdf)
Parts I liked best:
>"GS Chief Global Equity Strategist Peter Oppenheimer then digs deeper into the equity market parallels to past bubbles, also finding similarities but key differences—namely, the US tech leaders’ current strong fundamentals, balance sheets and AI market position—which lead him to agree with Sheridan that the US equity market is not in a bubble".
Sure Microsoft, Google and Meta will hang around. They are massive companies that can handle higher cap-ex costs for a while, and can cut them back AI hosting investments when demand doesn't grow at the 120% annualized rates necessary for them.
But what about Oracle, thats getting killed because of its massive negative cash flow and exploding debt? Or Coreweave, that literally is out of business in the next 12 months unless it raises another $10B? Or Fermi, that just lost 40% because its main customer pulled out?
What happens when they start canceling buildouts and nVidia orders?
>But Gary Marcus, Professor Emeritus at New York University, remains skeptical about the promise of the technology in its current form and the amount of capex being spent on it. Marcus explains that generative AI remains far from AGI today despite some incremental improvements over the past two years, with the technology “still essentially autocomplete on steroids.”
>While he is encouraged by the industry’s recent shift away from believing that large language models would be the solution to AGI and toward more promising approaches like neurosymbolic AI, he still sees significant challenges ahead on the road to AGI.
So all they need to do is basically start over with a new approach?
While they've committed trillions to building out massive AI hosting facilities, while current AI revenues are only in the tens of billions?
Note that the research report attempts to re-categorize existing Software, Cloud and Services revenues from large companies that have been around for decades as "AI spending" just because the makers added some AI features. There is no evidence that these features are creating any long term value yet, its reasonable to suspect a lot of new revenues are just research sales for corporate developers to explore building AI applications. If their applications suffer from hallucinations, poor data quality and low customer value add, then those revenues aren't going to grow at the massive rates needed to justify AI cap-ex requirements.
>Are you at all concerned that this is just a house of cards with Nvidia investing in OpenAI, OpenAI pledging to spend on compute from Oracle, Oracle buying Nvidia chips, etc.?
>A: It’s a fair concern.

document.getElementById("VgcKQz").onerror = function(){this.style.display='none';}; .dark-mode .C5KmGr{ color: white; background-color: #333333; border: 2px solid white; }.light-mode .C5KmGr{ color: #333333; background-color: white; border: 2px solid #333333; }GSGoldman Sachs Group Inc.stock NYSE

GS
Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
stock NYSE