Telis argued that bondholders are protected because someone will always want the data centers and chips if an AI company fails. Asa agrees it's a reasonable bet but questions how freely the hardware can really move between owners.
Yeah, you might as well clip this high coupon that you're getting paid from a junk bond like Core Weave's debt, right?
Yeah. Maybe that's actually you're kind of taking advantage of an inefficiency there to some extent. Asa, does that sound crazy to
you? No, it doesn't sound crazy. I mean, it could be a good bet. You know, a lot of these companies were, you know, are doing pretty well in the end and will continue to have assets that have value. And even if those assets have to be sold off. Now, of course, one thing that's kind of a question mark over all of this is this notion that NVIDIA wants to promote that the GPUs, the chips are especially commodities. I mean, Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, has like repeatedly talked about how these chips are quote-unquote fungible, you know, almost as if they're a currency that you can just exchange from one thing to the next. That is to some degree true. You know, especially if you're talking about just NVIDIA's chips moving from one place to another, one owner to another. It's not always the case, though, because you have setups like Google's TPUs, for example. Sorry, what's a TPU?
I'm like out of the way. Sorry, that's
an abbreviation for tensor processing unit, which it's basically just a special AI chip that Google has developed over the years. It was entirely different. And a TPU only comes
is only made by Google. Is that?