Live data from Hacker News

S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

heise.de

101–110 of 378 posts

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think anthropic with its enterprise strategy and google with its integration in everything have a bit of a moat. But I switched from ChatGPT to Claude 3 months ago because my account was down for like 6 hours. I haven’t used it since. It’s too easy to switch away from chatbots on a whim. There is no moat for that.

> I think anthropic with its enterprise strategy and google with its integration in everything have a bit of a moat. But... Anthropic doesn't have a moat. It's clear at this point that SOTA models are not a moat, and Opus 4.6-level (or GLM 5.2) is sufficient. Google, though... they own the entire vertical, from the semiconductors to the end-user software. They may have a moat.

Observationally, for people that /aren't/ using models to code but to just do their white-collar job, claude.ai /is/ AI, now. The entire perspective for how to use AI is through claude skills, claude projects, claude cowork, etc. They've massively won the corp buy-in at the moment I believe.

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#103
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They aren't finding AI to be have less ROI than before - they are requiring higher ROI than before, because there is less money remaining. What ROI? There was no return, and there currently isn't any return on investment, because those companies did not exit yet! The exit plan is to offload overpriced shares, that they paid billions for, onto the public market. If they don't IPO, those investors get nothing.

> The exit plan is to offload overpriced shares, that they paid billions for, onto the public market. If they don't IPO, those investors get nothing. I keep seeing these unsubstantiated claims. They’re out to get us and just pump and dump on public markets! Yet, before they IPO they have to go around and do what? Who sets the IPO price? Who buys the shares? If the shares tank, the valuation of the company goes down a…

> If the shares tank, the valuation of the company goes down and locked up shares lose value.

"Oh no, my $10B became $5B!"

They'll still be happy.

> If individual investors are buying shares and getting blown up, that’s their problem.

Having the general populace fleeced by bad actors is everyone's problem, eventually.

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#104
post #64

Is it me or do none of the AI companies have a "moat" in the Ben Grahmm sense. I use their services, but I frankly don't care who provides it. I'll chase the chepest/best and have no issue switching from one to another. The only moat I can see is Microsoft providing its services to companies in its Azure system. Nervous IT departments probably like that it's not leaving their control if Bob in the SAP team spins up s…

AWS and Google at least own their own hardware (Trainium and TPUs, respectively). It's a moat in the sense that designing, building, and deploying your own chips at scale is quite a feat and not easily replicated. The vertical integration will allow them to continue to be profitable once the models get good enough and competitors' prices race to the bottom. Google has Gemini; AWS may not deploy its own models (yet?),…

Isn't specialized hardware also a big risk? GPUs are more amenable to any big changes that may happen in the next 5, 10 years of AI research. Maybe we won't even be talking about LLMs anymore. Maybe matrix multiplication won't even be the main primitive.

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we tried to do a pilot with their cloud we couldn't even sign-up. None of the corporate credit cards were accepted. In addition to that the form basically only worked in Edge. We emailed support, they changed something on the backend. It still did not work. We gave up. In retrospective that was a very clear warning sign that their priorities were misguided. I'm glad we did not waste any further time and effort o…

Oracle Cloud sometimes feels like an elaborate prank that I'm not in on. I know people and companies on AWS (obviously), Azure, Google Cloud, Hetzner, CloudFlare's various PaaS offerings, etc., but I can't name a single thing running on Oracle Cloud. Somebody out there is clearly using but I'll be damned if I know who it is.

zoom. uber. airbnb. openai. bunch of banks. samsung, apparently..

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we tried to do a pilot with their cloud we couldn't even sign-up. None of the corporate credit cards were accepted. In addition to that the form basically only worked in Edge. We emailed support, they changed something on the backend. It still did not work. We gave up. In retrospective that was a very clear warning sign that their priorities were misguided. I'm glad we did not waste any further time and effort o…

Oracle Cloud sometimes feels like an elaborate prank that I'm not in on. I know people and companies on AWS (obviously), Azure, Google Cloud, Hetzner, CloudFlare's various PaaS offerings, etc., but I can't name a single thing running on Oracle Cloud. Somebody out there is clearly using but I'll be damned if I know who it is.

> I can't name a single thing running on Oracle Cloud

CrowdStrike and Uber

> Hetzner

I don't know of any upper market EMEA customers on Hetzner. I've met Scaleway, OVHCloud, and even STACKIT users but never Hetzner.

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#107

Is it me or do none of the AI companies have a "moat" in the Ben Grahmm sense. I use their services, but I frankly don't care who provides it. I'll chase the chepest/best and have no issue switching from one to another. The only moat I can see is Microsoft providing its services to companies in its Azure system. Nervous IT departments probably like that it's not leaving their control if Bob in the SAP team spins up s…

You may not care, but a lot of people I know care what brand chat bot they use personally,. usually it's tied to trust and reputation more than anything else. People are fickle.

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO these signals have more to do with the market than AI. They aren't finding AI to be have less ROI than before - they are requiring higher ROI than before, because there is less money remaining to be invested. Managing the total amount of money so that investment bubbles peter out before they get excessively big is supposed to be the central bank's job.

> They aren't finding AI to be have less ROI than before - they are requiring higher ROI than before, because there is less money remaining. What ROI? There was no return, and there currently isn't any return on investment, because those companies did not exit yet! The exit plan is to offload overpriced shares, that they paid billions for, onto the public market. If they don't IPO, those investors get nothing.

ROI on bank loans to Oracle and corporate bonds. Those will have interest rates and returns.

If Oracle is highly leveraged or betting the farm on AI, then their credit worthiness goes down.

Alternatively, if money floating around to make loans is drying up, companies have to offer better terms to attract the dwindling supply

Re: S&P Global has lowered Oracle’s creditworthiness from BBB to BBB-

#109
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They aren't finding AI to be have less ROI than before - they are requiring higher ROI than before, because there is less money remaining. What ROI? There was no return, and there currently isn't any return on investment, because those companies did not exit yet! The exit plan is to offload overpriced shares, that they paid billions for, onto the public market. If they don't IPO, those investors get nothing.

> The exit plan is to offload overpriced shares, that they paid billions for, onto the public market. If they don't IPO, those investors get nothing. I keep seeing these unsubstantiated claims. They’re out to get us and just pump and dump on public markets! Yet, before they IPO they have to go around and do what? Who sets the IPO price? Who buys the shares? If the shares tank, the valuation of the company goes down a…

My point was that there is no ROI until the investors exit!

IMO, those shares are overpriced even at private investment levels, but my opinion is still irrelevant to the fact that there is no ROI until the investors exit!

Post reply on HN