News Firm says Nvidia's skyrocketing AI valuation is in a 'bubble' and 'overhyped' — Elliott says AI apps are not viable

[Admin]

Elliot Management follows Sequoia Capital's assessment that AI is overhyped, which makes Nvidia's stock a bubble.

Firm says Nvidia's skyrocketing AI valuation is in a 'bubble' and 'overhyped' — Elliott says AI apps are not viable : Read more

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

People and experts have been saying this for some time, it's only starting to become more evident to people who don't really follow financial news as companies banking on AI, like Microsoft and Google, are continuing to show dismal AI profits that don't justify the hundreds of millions in investment in it.

Just better hope it deflates in spurts, like last week, and not all at once.

 

[yahrightthere]

So many so called experts have crystal balls & can say watch out for this that & the other, that any investor that relies solely on what others say without doing their own due diligence get what they deserve.
I believe that diversification is key to investing, along with knowing when to take profits & how to mitigate losses, & evaluate a companies financials.
How will Nvidia do in the coming months remains to be seen, there are those for & those against, only time will tell.
My own belief is that if a stock doubles in value, sell half to get the initial investment back & see where the stock goes on a longer term.
If a stock takes a 15-20% loss in value from the initial investment you may want to sell.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

I see AI marketing as an economic football. Coming out of the pandemic companies are desperate for any reason to justify a sale, and if that means harping on AI for the next 2-5 years then so be it. They'll find another marketing strategy after that.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

I see AI marketing as an economic football. Coming out of the pandemic companies are desperate for any reason to justify a sale, and if that means harping on AI for the next 2-5 years then so be it. They'll find another marketing strategy after that.

"AI" is great, but right now it's like an electric car in 1839: Not practical. Cost to develop is too high, and the products it deliver 99.9% of people aren't going to pay for.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

"AI" is great, but right now it's like an electric car in 1839: Not practical. Cost to develop is too high, and the products it deliver 99.9% of people aren't going to pay for.

Agreed. I've been experimenting with LMStudio. I've been thoroughly impressed with its free, offline models on my older hardware that I don't think I'll use ChatGPT any longer. They're going to need to significantly increase the intelligence if they want to monetize it.

 

[MacZ24]

AI is extensively used in a lot of fields. If you used a website that provides recommandations, it most probably uses machine learning algorithms to create those recommandations for example.

But chatbots, though impressive at first glance, are unreliable and cost a fortune to setup and train. And there are a lot of legal hurdles that have not been overcome yet and that leads to uncertainty.

AI makes sense as dedicated tools for professionnals.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

Agreed. I've been experimenting with LMStudio. I've been thoroughly impressed with its free, offline models on my older hardware that I don't think I'll use ChatGPT any longer. They're going to need to significantly increase the intelligence if they want to monetize it.

Even say AI was mature, efficient enough to run locally at a good speed, and did everything you wanted. Would you pay $20 a month/$240 a year for it like Google and Microsoft want now? It's a little different for professional applications, like law and medicine, where it's a small price for a huge benefit, but for the average consumer it's going to have to be included with an existing Microsoft 365/Google One/Apple One subscription for no or minimal additional cost for them to pay for it.

 

[ThomasKinsley]

Even say AI was mature, efficient enough to run locally at a good speed, and did everything you wanted. Would you pay $20 a month/$240 a year for it like Google and Microsoft want now? It's a little different for professional applications, like law and medicine, where it's a small price for a huge benefit, but for the average consumer it's going to have to be included with an existing Microsoft 365/Google One/Apple One subscription for no or minimal additional cost for them to pay for it.

Considering I'm turning down ChatGPT which is free, I have very high demands. 😄

I agree with your assessment. I would consider an extremely mature, offline AI for that price, but it would have to make a massive improvement in my workload to justify the cost.

 

[Notton]

I'm not an expert, but this AI stuff doesn't pass the sniff test.
It doesn't help this is hot on the heels of the NFT boom.

 

[thisisaname]

Yet another story that is looking to reduce Nvidia share price..

 

[aberkae]

Yet another story that is looking to reduce Nvidia share price..

A few more articles like these added with the yesterday's rumor about; Blackwell being delayed altogether till 2025 ( due to possible design flaw); as well as Nvidia cutting production on 4000 series; also 3060 supply finally drying up and watch that stock drop like its not hot in a bear market that just started . VIX index hit 30 last week. The unknown future of the political landscape changing frequently is also a contributing factor.
The reason imo why article's like these are rare and either are pure/unbiased or extremely biased is because either the holders want people to sell so they can but low or buy so they can sell high.