Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

io-fund.com

41–50 of 197 posts

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#41
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the point. The issue is that loaning/investing to a client so they can buy from you conflates your investments with your revenue. It may be fine, or not. It it has been a frequent type of manipulation to obfuscate the real accounting situation.

Yeah, it's basically creating the illusion of demand and revenue. Lots of fraud in the past relied on companies "investing" into companies which then bought from the investor. I'm not sure to what degree this is happening now, though, and to what degree this is benign.

I’m not sure anyone can really say now, the terms and details are too opaque. But, given the history the opacity is itself a red flag.

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#42
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the point. The issue is that loaning/investing to a client so they can buy from you conflates your investments with your revenue. It may be fine, or not. It it has been a frequent type of manipulation to obfuscate the real accounting situation.

People are investing because if Nvidia are essentially buying shares with graphics cards then they're motivated to make this stuff work. If the invested in company's share price tanks, Nvidia loses out, and I imagine quite a few people are willing to win or lose alongside Nvidia.

In general for these deals, and the ones with SPVs even more we don’t know. It may be as straightforward as equity for GPUs, but not enough information has been released.

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#44
Dumb question, but when the Nebius capacity dashboard says they have around 3 non-preemptible B200s available, does that mean _total_, or is it just how many I myself might be able to rent on demand?

One aspect of the profitability might be the utilization and the pricing a few years down the line for slightly older hardware. Already now it seems like the increased processing you get from newer devices versus the cost difference makes something like an H100 or even A100 significantly less desirable than newer more powerful ones. As an individual, I am happy to be able to get an H200 on demand, but the B200 or B300 can do so much more work with optimized software and models for only modestly more cost that if those become available then from a business perspective you really have to prefer that if you can keep it occupied.

Then with Vera Rubin being like 3 times more effective or whatever, that adds a new layer of gradual obsolescence. So the question is can they keep the pricing up on the older ones a few years down the line enough to fill out the end of those expected payback periods.

The real boogeyman for a neocloud that has heavily invested in expensive Nvidia hardware might be a variation of that beyond Nvidia with startups that have even more dramatic efficiency increases pushing the leading edge even further. For example, if companies like Mythic AI and d-Matrix could somehow rapidly rapidly scale, that would push prices down for all of Nvidia hardware that is significantly less efficient.

I guess so far it doesn't look like any startups with really big efficiency breakthroughs are even close to being able to scale like Nvidia though, especially with the manufacturing and power crunch. But I suspect some of that is because of favoritism and strong arming protecting investments rather than a free and fair ecosystem.

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#45

I've said it before, I will say it again: all that circular investment, all the IOUs, all the billions of dollars of money that are floating around in the entire AI web... it will seriously wreck the US economy, the volume is orders of magnitude worse than what caused the 2007ff global financial crisis. But if OpenAI and Anthropic both manage to enter the fray as well and automatically get made part of the NASDAQ and…

>> the volume is orders of magnitude worse than what caused the 2007ff global financial crisis. Nobody lives in GPUs and what was the ratio of equity/debt for the toxic assets in 2007?

It looks more similar to the 1929 crash to me, where "too big to fail" blue chip stocks were overinvested and overvalued, and the value adjustments rippled through the rest of the economy. If NVIDIA does get a meaningful value adjustment downwards, it'll probably survive, but it'll impact the S&P500. People will need to sell off other stocks to cover the losses, etc. etc.

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#46

Why is it a big deal? Nvidia invested $2b into CoreWeave for 9% equity stake. CoreWeave is spending $35b in CapEx in 2026. Therefore, Nvidia's investment is only 5.7% of CoreWeave's single year CapEx. The other $32b is coming from other sources that isn't Nvidia. This is hardly circular. Nvidia invests in Neoclouds because it's a hedge against hyperscalers having too much power, ie designing and prioritizing their ow…

anyone can isolate one number to fit their bias. if you look at the wider financing in the industry and the context of multiple AI deals in the billions without any cold hard cash flow or reasoning it kinda makes sense

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#47
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> the volume is orders of magnitude worse than what caused the 2007ff global financial crisis. Nobody lives in GPUs and what was the ratio of equity/debt for the toxic assets in 2007?

It looks more similar to the 1929 crash to me, where "too big to fail" blue chip stocks were overinvested and overvalued, and the value adjustments rippled through the rest of the economy. If NVIDIA does get a meaningful value adjustment downwards, it'll probably survive, but it'll impact the S&P500. People will need to sell off other stocks to cover the losses, etc. etc.

nvidia's forward p/e is 24. walmart's is 39.

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#48
post #14

Why is it a big deal? Nvidia invested $2b into CoreWeave for 9% equity stake. CoreWeave is spending $35b in CapEx in 2026. Therefore, Nvidia's investment is only 5.7% of CoreWeave's single year CapEx. The other $32b is coming from other sources that isn't Nvidia. This is hardly circular. Nvidia invests in Neoclouds because it's a hedge against hyperscalers having too much power, ie designing and prioritizing their ow…

> Why is it a big deal? Nvidia invested $2b into CoreWeave for 9% equity stake. Depends if they actually got the $2b in real money. There's a difference. It's a big deal if no money was involved. Nothing even entered the company directly. Some deals have structured with Special Purpose Vehicles where money goes to the SPV. The SPV buys GPUs with it (from Nvidia). GPUs is loaned back to the company involved. So this c…

NVIDIA's $2b into CoreWeave was a stock purchase.

https://investors.coreweave.com/news/news-details/2026/NVIDI...

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#49

Why is it a big deal? Nvidia invested $2b into CoreWeave for 9% equity stake. CoreWeave is spending $35b in CapEx in 2026. Therefore, Nvidia's investment is only 5.7% of CoreWeave's single year CapEx. The other $32b is coming from other sources that isn't Nvidia. This is hardly circular. Nvidia invests in Neoclouds because it's a hedge against hyperscalers having too much power, ie designing and prioritizing their ow…

It sounds like Nvidia is not only supplying GPUs first to neoclouds, it is also supplying them for free if they cannot be resold:

"Furthermore, in the case of CoreWeave, Nvidia has also provided a significant financial backstop against unsold GPU capacity. Under the agreement with an initial value of $6.3 billion, “in instances where [CoreWeave’s] datacenter capacity is not fully utilized by its own customers, NVIDIA is obligated to purchase the residual unsold capacity through April 13, 2032.” In other words, Nvidia is committed to purchasing unsold GPU capacity if CoreWeave is unable to find another buyer. With an initial value of $6.3 billion, there is the potential that the arrangement could become larger over time."

I don't know how Nvidia is handling Coreweave GPU sales revenue in their accounting, but it sounds to me like it should have a pretty big asterisk attached to it. It's more like a consignment arrangement than an actual sale. And it obviously creates a huge incentive for Coreweave to over-order GPUs, since there's no risk (I doubt they're paying cash up front).

Re: Nvidia, CoreWeave, and Nebius: Inside the Circular Financing of the GPU Boom

#50
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks more similar to the 1929 crash to me, where "too big to fail" blue chip stocks were overinvested and overvalued, and the value adjustments rippled through the rest of the economy. If NVIDIA does get a meaningful value adjustment downwards, it'll probably survive, but it'll impact the S&P500. People will need to sell off other stocks to cover the losses, etc. etc.

nvidia's forward p/e is 24. walmart's is 39.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN