Investor known for betting against the subprime mortgage market before the 2008 financial crisis, a story told in Michael Lewis's book The Big Short. He has worked as a portfolio manager at Neuberger Berman.
Writes and hosts The Real Eisman Playbook, a newsletter and podcast on markets, and appears regularly on Prof G Markets, discussing AI valuations and market concentration risk.
In a replayed clip, an investor is asked whether he would buy into Anthropic after reading its S-1, and says no. Here he explains the bigger worry: huge compute commitments paired with price as the only competitive lever.
The Prof G Pod with Scott GallowayAround 22:37 into the episode
George Hahn
…the Anthropic S1 is that the income statement doesn't tell you the full story. It doesn't mean it's a bad company. It doesn't mean they don't have an incredible product. They do. But it does mean that there is still a lot of risk. The business model hasn't been figured out yet. And until it is,
Speaker 2
…an answer for that. That I can answer you. Tell me. No. I was going to ask you: are those? I was going to go to the point quickly. I was going to ask you: would you need to know the answers to the questions that you just brought up before investing? I assume the answer is yes, you would. Oh, yes.
Speaker 3
But I think, look, to me, the bigger, bigger, bigger question is: it just seems that there are no moats around this business. I mean, if it's the case that they actually did cut prices by 50%, that would reinforce. The concept that there are no modes and that the only way you're going to gain share is price. Being in a business where you are committed to spend $800 billion, where your entire franchise is just simply based on price, is dangerous. It's not a good idea, but it's not a good idea. I like that out and it's not a good thing.
Speaker 4
Laura is a podcast from the Nedland Reinhardt von Bank.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman was walking through a table built from Anthropic's S-1 plus public third-quarter figures. The S-1 covers the first half, which he calls the height of enterprise 'token maxing'; his point is that the quarter after it shows growth slowing sharply.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 11:45 into the episode
Speaker 2
The global energy markets are in a
Speaker 1
chronic period of undersupply, driven primarily by the hot wars around the world that are often deeply intertwined with energy production. We believe World War III started in 2014 for reasons we can talk about.
Steve Eisman
…really counts. I also show the company's compute and infrastructure expense during the same periods. And I then calculate Anthropic's efficiency ratio, which I define as its revenue divided by the compute expense. And I also show the sequential percentage change in quarterly revenue. Now, for those of you who are only listening, I think a clear picture emerges, and it is what I have feared. During the first half of this year, I thought that Anthropic and OpenAI were benefiting a lot from token maxing. That was where enterprises told their employees to use AI and to hell with the cost. But that ended this summer when costs got out of control and companies now had the option to switch to cheaper open weight models. So I assumed that once token maxing ended, growth would slow. Still, there would be growth, but slower. And I think that is what these numbers seem to show. If we go back to the fourth quarter of last year, just before token maxing, Anthropic's quarterly revenue grew sequentially by 43%. Its revenue divided by compute expense was 0.69 times. Then token maxing took off, and so did Anthropic. Q126 and Q226 sequential revenue growth jumped to 135% and then…
Speaker 1
Say you've always wanted to sneak away for a last-minute long weekend in Napa. Here's the thing: if you get smart with your money, you could do things like that. With Empower, you can start making the most out of your money so you can go out and live a little. Isn't that why we work so hard to have…
Steve Eisman
Hi, Steve Eisman here. The most successful businesses in the world share one secret: they know exactly where every dollar goes, what to cut and where to double down. With RAMP, you can see exactly what's happening across the business in real time. RAMP combines corporate cards, expense management…
Speaker 2
Welcome to the Disney Partner Day.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Asked what else to watch in AI, Eisman pointed to the price of CoreWeave's debt, which he put at around 15%. He suspects that rate is already prohibitive for building data centers, unless NVIDIA steps in to backstop the company.
…when people, you know, some people they'll always say, it's in the price. It's in the price. And I always want to say, how did you know? Like, who did you ask? Did you take a poll? Like, like, on what basis do you say that? But people say this all the time. And I, and I always say, I don't know.
Ed Elson
Just as we start to wrap up here, any other things that you're looking at in AI world, things that you think are especially important that we should keep track of? Well,
Speaker 3
the other big thing to keep track of, obviously, is the price of Corweave's debt. You know, it. 15%. I think, although I can't prove it, I think it's prohibitive for them to raise debt at 15% and build AI data centers. But, you know, if it gets worse, then they're really out of business. You know, their business model is basically: we raise debt, we build AI data centers. That's it. That's the entire business model. And if they can't raise debt, they can't build AI data centers. That's really the now. Maybe, you know, NVIDIA will come in and backstop the whole company. You know, it's totally possible. But barring that, you know, I would be watching the debt markets.
Ed Elson
Steve Eisman Isn't the legendary big short investor and host of the Real Eisman Playbook, which is a great podcast. I highly recommend it. Steve, always appreciate your time.
Speaker 3
Thank you.
Ed Elson
After the break, the state of play in the autonomous vehicle race. And for even more markets insights, you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter. Simply put, go to edwardelson.substack.com.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Ed Elson asked Eisman whether he would invest in Anthropic's IPO. Eisman said the bigger question than the S-1's numbers is whether the business has any moat at all; the 50% price cut he mentions is one he was treating as a report, not a confirmed fact.
You got to the point quickly. I was going to ask you, would you need to know the answers to the questions that you just brought up before investing? I assume the answer is, yes, you would. Well,
Speaker 3
yes, but I think, look, to me, the bigger, the bigger, bigger, bigger question is it just seems that there are no moats around this business. I mean, if it's the case that they actually did cut prices by 50%, that would reinforce the concept that there are no moats and that the only way you're going to gain share is price. Being in a business where you are committed to spend $800 billion where your entire franchise is just simply based on price is dangerous.
Ed Elson
There is another interesting angle on this S1, which was the governance structure.
Speaker 3
Oh, please. It's ridiculous. I mean, what's there to talk about? You're a shareholder in this company. You have no rights. Okay. Let's move on. If you want to invest in that company, that's up to you. You know, it's been disclosed. You have no rights, zero rights. You want to play? Play. You don't…
Ed Elson
Just to clarify for our listeners, so there are multiple classes of stock here. You've got the regular voting shares. You've got the regular non-voting shares. Then you have this class T share, which is controlled by what they call the long-term benefit trust. And apparently, this is sort of this…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman sets up his question to economist Benn Steil about the doomsayers on the US federal deficit. Steil's answer: the dollar is "the winner of an ugly dog contest," but the share of Treasury buyers who don't care about price has fallen from 76% to 43%, which makes the debt harder to fund.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 18:15 into the episode
Steve Eisman
Let's switch topics. We've only covered small things so far. Let's talk about, I'm very curious. You're an economist. I am not. The U.S. federal deficit.
Benn Steil
Currently running about 6% of the annual.
Steve Eisman
So my question for you is: first, I'm going to ask you what's your position about the threat of the debt and of the U.S. debt to the overall economy and the Treasury market. But I want to preface it by saying, you know, people who are call them doomsdayers about the U.S. federal deficit, and there are many people and they're very respectable. What I say about them is I don't have a strong opinion on this topic. All I know is that you guys have been making this argument for 40 years. Because I remember Pete Peterson in the 90s making literally every single sentence that Ray Dalio utters now, Pete Peterson was uttering in the 90s. And when you make an argument for 40 years and you've been wrong for 40 years, there's got to be a reason why you were wrong for 40 years. So that's how I want to preface. Take it away.
Benn Steil
Yeah, so the best way I've heard the U.S. dollar described as the winner of an ugly dog contest.
Steve Eisman
Right.
Benn Steil
You can only compare this particular dog to the rest of the dogs that are out there in the company. As everybody
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman was comparing an AI funding break with 2008. He says it would look more like a General Motors-style bankruptcy than a banking collapse: painful for the economy, but not a threat to the financial system.
The Compound and FriendsAround 10:52 into the episode
Steve Eisman
So this is more like the General Motors story. Okay. I mean, it's a very big story.
Speaker 3
Or if you can't get your trips out of the data center, then what?
Steve Eisman
Well, that's bad for you. Yeah. You know, but it's not the end of the world. I mean, I mean, we obviously will go more into the AI story, but if just, for example, OpenAI went bankrupt tomorrow. And I'm not making that prediction, but let's just say that it did. I think the U.S. economy would go into a recession. You do. I do. It's not the same thing as a great financial crisis. The banks are fine.
Speaker 3
How do they become so systemically important? This is a non-public company. I know in the private market, the valuation is a trillion, a trillion and a half, whatever it is. How did they become so systemically important in three years to the point where they could send the entire U.S. economy into…
Steve Eisman
made, they and Anthropic both went out and made commitments to basically everybody who would take their pen.
Speaker 3
Right.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman argues the AI labs face a price war from cheaper open-weight models, and that their calls for regulation are partly an attempt to shut out competitors. Here he contrasts how freely users switch between models with how locked-in Google search users were.
The Compound and FriendsAround 01:05 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…Mercedes-Benz for every road trip. So they're losing market share. There's pretty good evidence that a price war is starting and they're petrified. And so they created this, the world's going to end unless you regulate us because they think if they get regulated, they can manipulate the regulation.
Speaker 3
Or they could stop the open weight models. That's too much.
Steve Eisman
They could manipulate the regulation to keep the Chinese open weight models out and so they could have a duopoly. And the basic problem with the entire AI enterprise is that there are no moats. None. Absolutely none. One model is good one day and then people switch to the next. It's not like Google. Everybody was on Google forever. No one ever, you even, you were on Google forever so much. The concept of not being on Google, you couldn't even think that. Today you use Claude. Claude one day, you don't like that. You go to Gemini. You don't like use that for a while. You go to Chat GPT. There are no moats. People are spending a trillion dollars. Are you surprised
Speaker 3
by that? How easy it is for people to switch from one to another?
Steve Eisman
I'm not surprised or surprised. It is what it is.
Speaker 3
Right. Okay. Because I always thought the one that would win was the one that remembers the most.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Asked what the market is telling him about earnings and valuations, Eisman says he isn't sensitive to valuation in that way. For him, the only thing that matters for stocks right now is the story investors believe about AI.
The Compound and FriendsAround 40:45 into the episode
Steve Eisman
am not valuation sensitive in that way. All right,
Speaker 4
but what's market telling me? The
Steve Eisman
market is pure narrative. It is pure narrative. And there is only one narrative that matters right now, and that's AI. So you tell me what happens to the AI narrative, and I'll tell you what happens to the stock market. Period. That's all that matters.
Speaker 3
So I think that's true. And, you know, a lot of people say the stock market is not the economy. I think right now it kind of is. Like, I think we're talking about companies that aren't even public yet having the ability to cause a recession. So, the companies that are public, I really think all of…
Steve Eisman
wow. And now, the bond
Speaker 3
market, we learned, as Michael said, we learned yesterday how important to prevailing yields, the ability to sell debt. I really think this is one of those situations where the economy did become the stock market. And it may not last forever, but like right in this moment, I think it's more true…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman was explaining why private equity firms bought so many subscription software companies between 2017 and 2023. He goes on to say two things have since broken the model: the variable-rate debt got much more expensive, and fear of AI has cut what software companies are worth.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 03:53 into the episode
Speaker 1
…time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit at Indeed.com/slash podcast. That's indeed.com/slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed Sponsored Jobs.
Steve Eisman
…equity firms to all things software because the debt tightened as inflation post-COVID grew for the first time in many years and rates rose. This slowdown really showed up in the 2023 numbers. Now, before we get to how these deals were financed, let's first think through the nature of the problem. Private Equity's liked to buy software companies because they fell in love with the SaaS model. The SaaS model gives private equity comfort because it is easily modelable. Multiply the average price charged customers by the average number of customers, and you've modeled revenue. Easy peasy. Now, make assumptions about the growth in customers and how much you can increase prices, and you can see a glorious future. Then lever it up with a nice amount of debt, and you are in business. Two things have happened since 2023. First, interest rates, obviously, are much higher, as therefore interest rate expenses have exploded since these deals were all funded with variable rate debt. So higher rates have already negatively impacted the earnings and cash flow of all of these companies. Second, the SAS Pocalypse has hit valuations hard. The original version of the SAS Pocalypse was…
Speaker 1
When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed Sponsored Jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates…
Steve Eisman
Hi, Steve Eisman here. You know those pieces in your closet you find yourself wearing on repeat? The sweater that goes with everything, the perfect pair of pants or the t-shirt you somehow always reach for first. Those are the pieces that make getting dressed easy, and that's what Quince does best.…
Steve Eisman
audio, and documents. I'm sure many of you. Have used Adobe. The perception is that Adobe is particularly vulnerable to AI. Now, Adobe hit an all-time high of $630 a share in February 2024. Today, the stock is 240. That is the decline of Get This 62%. Now, Adobe is not the only software company…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
From Eisman's weekly monologue on private equity's exposure to software companies. He was explaining why so much institutional money flowed into private equity after the 2008 financial crisis in the first place. He argues that money was then invested with leverage at very low rates, and that the software buyouts it paid for are now in trouble.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 15:33 into the episode
Speaker 1
…time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit at Indeed.com/slash podcast. That's indeed.com/slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed Sponsored Jobs.
Steve Eisman
…where you heard about them, let them know was the Real Eyes in Playbook. It's the best way to support the show. Let's use a public company, Adobe, as a proxy for the entire software sector. Now, Adobe software is used to create, edit, and manage digital media, including photos, graphics, videos,
Steve Eisman
…to zero. Soon, some number of investors who piled into private equity deals offering a great potential return will find their investments are worthless. One of the reasons why private equity has grown so much since the great financial crisis is because of what I call a sleight of hand. During the GFC, institutions watched the value of their assets decline every day. It was a painful experience. After the GFC, many institutions realized that if they invested in private equity, the volatility of their assets would be reduced. I call this a sleight of hand because the volatility was still there. They were just not provided a daily price. Private Equity's Software took those assets and invested the proceeds in an exceptionally low rate environment, which was perfect for a strategy employing leverage. Times changed. Rates are now much higher. The days of easy money are over and private equity is overexposed to software companies, which has become extremely problematic. It's going to be years for private equity to work through…
Edwin Dorsey
I believe these prediction markets provide a lot of high-quality value and information, which helps people make better decisions.
Steve Eisman
Edwin has become an expert in prediction markets, and we focused on those markets and some of their problems. Next week on Premium, on Wednesday, October 7th, we will post an interview with Joseph Carlson, who is a podcaster. We discussed where Joseph, a former software engineer, thinks AI is…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Asked about the recent rate hike, Eisman says he is more worried about the 10-year yield. His argument is that data centers are funded with long-term debt, so roughly $500 billion of AI borrowing this year competes with the government's own borrowing. He says the 10-year would be much lower without AI.
…And I think part of the reason why the 10-year is so high, other than that, the oil prices are up and people are nervous, is that AI is a $500 billion issuance this year, and it's having a crowding out effect of the treasury markets. If there was no AI, none, the 10-year would be much lower.
Ed Elson
Could you spell out why that would be the case for us?
Steve Eisman
…raising overnight debt. You're raising long-term debt. You're raising 10-year debt, something like that. So the Treasury has a $6 trillion deficit this year. Now I add on top of that $500 billion in AI debt. And there's a bit of a competition, which didn't exist before. So I think one of the reasons why the 10-year is as high as it is is because, like I said, there's a crowding out effect where AI debt is crowding out Treasury, which is a crazy statement because nobody ever crowded out Treasury before, but now they are. And that's why Scott Besson tried to pull a rabbit out of the hat by trying to buy $6 billion. Dollars worth of long-term treasuries in something called Operation Twist, where he would issue short-term debt to buy long-term treasuries. And it's failed miserably. So the Treasury Department has lost a lot of credibility because when he started, I think the tenure was like at 4.75 and now it's at…
Ed Elson
Yeah, what do you make of his comments about that buyback program? Because his view was that yields were wrong, that the markets were incorrectly saying something about the sustainability of the U.S. economy that wasn't true. And he was trying to correct it back to the truth. Do you agree with him?…
Steve Eisman
I think it's a weird argument. I mean, the treasury markets are pretty efficient. They're more than pretty efficient. They're really efficient. So to say that they're wrong, what are they wrong about? I mean, there's a war going on. The oil prices are higher. You know, diesel fuel is at an all-time…
Ed Elson
Just in terms of this AI bubble story, which has been around for a very long time at this point.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman spends much of this weekly wrap on how AI data centers are being financed, using Meta's $27 billion Louisiana project as his example: the debt sits in a special purpose vehicle Meta owns 20% of, so it stays off Meta's balance sheet even though Meta builds it, rents it for 20 years, and absorbs the overruns. He walks through Enron's SPVs and the pre-2008 structured investment vehicles as precedent, and expects more such deals, "and not just at Meta."
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 07:03 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…I'm providing you in this class with all the tools to understand how banks work and how to think about large cap and small cap and mid-cap and the investment banks as well. This coming Wednesday, September 30th, we will post an interview with Edwin Dorsey, creator of the Bear Cave newsletter.
Edwin Dorsey
I believe these prediction markets provide a lot of high-quality value and information, which helps people make better decisions.
Steve Eisman
Ed has become a real expert in prediction markets, and we spend a great deal of time discussing the value of prediction markets and their problems. Also, we get occasional requests from subscribers to purchase our coffee mugs, pillows, and other merchandise. Go to steveeisman.com, which will bring you to Substack and our merchandise page. On this week's wrap, we will discuss the war in Iran, oil prices, and interest rates, troubling news from Oracle and Blue Owl Capital, Paramount cleared for takeoff, softbank junk borrowing to fund an equity investment, some aspects of AI circular financing that I find particularly disturbing. Meta's beignet, Meta's Muse, now that Agentic AI is cute, is it deflationary and will it make a real difference? And one mailbag about shorting against the box. And now let's get started. I've said this before. This is a tough market, and that the only two variables that matter right now are oil prices and the 10-year yield, neither of which, in my view, is predictable and both of which move the market. War news flips…
Speaker 4
Low energy, unfocused, foggy? You might be dehydrated. Whether it's hot yoga, over 100-degree weather, or too much sun. Gatorlight, with a specialized blend of five electrolytes, was scientifically designed to help move fluids into the body faster for rapid rehydration. Shop now at retailers…
Steve Eisman
Hi, Steve Eisman here. Most people spend days researching a hotel, but life insurance, they take the first quote and move on. SelectQuote shops over 100 policies and finds you a better rate for free in about 15 minutes. You'll save an average of 30%. On $150,000 monthly premium, that's over $10,000…
Speaker 4
I see you.
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman, who is best known for shorting subprime mortgages, says he cannot understand why almost nobody outside a few Substack writers has picked this up from NVIDIA's own filing. It sits inside a longer argument he and George Noble make that the AI trade rests on a short chain of dependencies — and that far down that chain are two companies, OpenAI and Anthropic, that lose enormous sums. Note that he slides from receivables to revenue mid-sentence; the 70% figure in the filing is accounts receivable.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 20:11 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…of drives me crazy. But I'll turn it around. If by some miracle, Anthropic and OpenAI became insanely profitable, it wouldn't matter because the loans would be good. The circular financing just tells me that there's probably something wrong. But in and of itself, it's not necessarily the issue.
George Noble
Correct. But what you wouldn't do, you wouldn't blindly say, oh, look at the earnings, look at the PE. Not at all. I'm going to give you an example on something that NVIDIA
Steve Eisman
when they reported that I still to this day can't understand why no one has commented on this other than a few sub stackers, which is NVIDIA's revenue in the quarter that was just recently reported was up over 100%. But if you go in the queue, it says that 70% of accounts receivable is from five accounts. I mean, think about it this way, that the largest company on planet Earth, basically 70% of its revenue comes from five. Customers is very frightening.
George Noble
Yes.
Steve Eisman
That's frightening.
George Noble
But as you pointed out, the receivables piling up, the loans, the whole deal, if it was a healthy system, if the banks thought this was a good business or private credits now and it's back on its heels. If there were healthy lenders that thought these are good credits, they'd make loans. They'd…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
This is Eisman's verdict on the slowdown push, arriving at the end of a long argument that Amodei and Altman cannot afford to slow down and do not intend to. It lands right after he distinguishes lying to investors, which he calls old-school Wall Street fraud, from lying to politicians. The damage he has in mind is concrete: data-center regulation becoming a local election issue and the public coming to fear the product.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 19:43 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…information into easy-to-use and organized information flow. Once you try it on a first meeting, it's hard to go without. You can try it totally free. Head to granola.ai/slash Eisman. That's granola.ai slash Eisman to get your time back. Go to granola.ai/slash Eisman and try it on your next call.
Speaker 3
…and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. Thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly. Learn more at schwab.com/slash trading. Now,
Steve Eisman
…they are fomenting hysteria, thereby inviting the federal government to regulate the industry. I think they believe that via that regulation, they can create moats that will foster an AI duopoly. That's what's really going on. It's ugly. Lying has unintended consequences. It's one thing to lie to investors. That's old school Wall Street fraud. Lying to politicians can disrupt the entire economy. AI won't cause extinction, but these two CEOs are creating massive damage. At this point, this gambit looks like it's a complete failure. President Trump stated this week that he has no interest in regulating AI. So I bet the entire doomsday slowdown narrative is going to disappear very quickly. However, the damage is done. Data center regulation is the centerpiece of many local elections. And now people actually fear and believe that the product being created in the…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman spends this monologue arguing that the calls from Anthropic and OpenAI to slow down are a bid for regulation that would protect their pricing. This line is the premise the whole theory rests on: open-weight models keep taking share, so today's best model is tomorrow's cheaper one. He goes on to claim the two labs are inviting federal regulation precisely because it would build the moat the market will not give them.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 19:43 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…information into easy-to-use and organized information flow. Once you try it on a first meeting, it's hard to go without. You can try it totally free. Head to granola.ai/slash Eisman. That's granola.ai slash Eisman to get your time back. Go to granola.ai/slash Eisman and try it on your next call.
Speaker 3
…and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. Thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly. Learn more at schwab.com/slash trading. Now,
Steve Eisman
…don't want anyone to know that business is slowing or getting more difficult while costs are rising and capital is scarcer. They prefer scaring everyone into creating some kind of regulation that will protect their pricing power in the U.S. They are moving the shells fast and furious. Business is potentially slowing because token maxing is ending and open weight models keep taking market share. There are no pricing moats in this business. Today, I have the best LLM and tomorrow yours is better and cheaper. At the same time that business is slowing, the cost of building data centers and the cost of capital are increasing. Anthropic and open AI need moats to defend their businesses because they see, I believe, a price war coming. So they are fomenting hysteria, thereby inviting the federal government to regulate the industry. I…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
Eisman opens his weekly wrap by listing what he will cover, including what he calls the insatiable need for commentators to predict a dystopian ending to the AI bubble, and then, next on the list, why he is not there yet. He spends the rest of the episode arguing that OpenAI's troubles could tip the US into a recession, so the reluctance is not disbelief. It is the man who called 2008 declining to spend that credit twice.
The Real Eisman PlaybookAround 06:36 into the episode
Steve Eisman
…months, we've gotten several requests from subscribers to interview Ed Zitron, the Substack newsletter writer, who is one of the most famous critics of the entire AI story. So I'm pleased to announce that this coming Wednesday, September 9, on premium, we will post an interview with Ed Zitron.
Speaker 3
It's OpenAI and Anthropic to account for 48% of all of Google Cloud's revenues next year. Which is huge. That's crazy. That means that Google Cloud's growth is based on whether these companies survive
Steve Eisman
…on the show, every universe Stewart jumps to is just another form of dystopia. Show is quite funny, but captures something essential. There is something about imagining a dystopian future that people find captivating. I've noticed that over the years, since the GFC, whenever I am interviewed, the interviewer is almost begging me to predict the end of the world. How do I feel about that? Well, I predicted the end of the world once, and believe me, it was no fun. I am in no rush to predict to the end of the world again unless I am really convinced that it's going to happen. But I'm not going to make such a prediction just because it will get a lot of press. There is no question in my mind that the entire U.S. economy hinges on the success of AI. The amount being spent is just so large that were it to stop, the economy would go into a recession almost immediately. There are several commentators who are making exactly that prediction. They could be right, but right…
Ben Zaperski
When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed Sponsored Jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates…
Speaker 4
This episode is brought to you by State Farm. Listening to this podcast instead of doom scrolling? Smart move. Another smart move? Getting help from one of State Farm's 19,000 local agents when you choose to bundle home and auto. Bundling, just another way to save with the personal price plan.…
Steve Eisman
According to Ed Zittron, our guest in Week, to survive, OpenAI will have to raise $100 billion per year for the next several years. Now, when you lose billions upon billions, appearances matter a lot. OpenAI is completely dependent on the kindness of strangers funding its cash flow needs. When a…
Speaker names come from our own diarization. The position is estimated from where the line sits in the episode.
