|
|
|
|
|
by swman
826 days ago
|
|
tbf maybe my analogy is wrong but I see there are various players like nvidia and open ai (shovels), vector db and other "infra" type startups (laundromats), and everyone else who is building apps in this ecosystem (miners). The miners keep coming and going because most of their apps either fall way short of actual enterprise value/expectations, or can be easily incorporated into the big players. Who exactly benefited during the gold rushes of the 1850s? I think it was everyone else but the miners. Did some miners make a fortune? Sure, but what remains of their legacy today is the foundations laid by the shovel makers and laundromats that allowed california to blossom. |
|
So that is to say, to be a smart business, the company's product should be a tool that the miners need, instead of the tool, because it's seen as more of a sure thing. but this is the real world and there's no such thing as a sure thing. Hearst, Studebaker, Stanford were miners that struck gold. Where the analogy falls apart is that the gold is a bit harder to mine so there are a vast array of shovels with different attachments and gizmos, so you could build a shovel that only catches dirt and lets all the gold run out. To abuse the analogy. Not all shovels are equal, and so eg is AMD a good buy right now.
In this gold rush, Nvidia is the shovel, Supermicro is the handle, Micron is the stick, and TSMC is the atoms those things are made up of. Except for some reason, MU and TSM haven't popped the same way NVDA and SMCI have.