Does anyone really think that there is any agreement in the world that will keep companies paying $1000 for a product priced at $20 on the market? The larger the gap the larger the incentiv to break the agreement.
They are in saas metrics territory in terms of margins, this is insane.
Moreover, the AI companies have not bought anything with their own money, but with the money of naive investors who believe that their money will be used by the AI companies to buy things out of which they will be able to get the most value.
So for now, this is strictly only speculation, which has driven the prices sky high. It remains to be seen who will really get any value (besides Micron, NVIDIA and the like, who have got good money for their products).
Why not just sell on the open market, and let traders and financiers and all their prediction models give you the best possible price?
It lives with some of the other things I'm grieving due to the AI boom, like Apple's car project.
digitaltrees•2h ago
naturalmovement•2h ago
small_model•1h ago
try-working•1h ago
regularfry•1h ago
rob74•54m ago
Arnt•34m ago
So clearly 16 large buyers consider it likely that prices will go even higher. How likely? >10% chance? Likely enough to sign an agreement.
baal80spam•1h ago
Doubt it. Has it EVER happened before?
dygd•1h ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVzeHTlWIDY
zarzavat•48m ago
willis936•31m ago
In all seriousness, the payoff of a real competitor not in the cartel entering at some time in the next five years would be huge. They would have business through the busts because people would go to them first. The challenge will be fighting corruption every step along the way. They would have to keep a sharp legal team on staff for all the litigating necessary to defend against anti-competitive practices and even then would only succeed in a legal and political environment accepting of anti-corruption enforcement.
cm2187•47m ago
striking•1h ago
> To date, five manufacturers have pleaded guilty to their involvement in an international price-fixing conspiracy between July 1, 1998, and June 15, 2002, including Hynix, Infineon, Micron Technology, Samsung, and Elpida.
It is history; we have not learned; we are doomed to repeat it.
baq•1h ago
[0] can actually be anyone
m4rtink•5m ago
cm2187•1h ago
By giving them stability of cash flows, the AI companies are enabling them to make those investments and to ramp up production. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. Over time it should ease the squeeze on chips.
cycomanic•33m ago
For decades now we have seen the expectations that software businesses (and in particular FANGs) have pushed any hardware margnins to be more and more like commodities, while they were extracting all the value.
pyrale•26m ago
adrian_b•20m ago
Decades ago, when memory production still existed in many countries, no such margin increases would have been possible.
Even now, this would not have been possible without the US government actively suppressing competition in the memory market, by sabotaging the Chinese memory producers.
The so-called "sanctions" against the Chinese memory producers have started some years ago precisely in the moment when Micron was threatened to lose market share to the Chinese producers (e.g. when Apple was considering to switch to them as providers). Based on the "Cui prodest?" principle, it is extremely likely that Micron was the entity who lobbied the US government to sabotage the Chinese memory producers, creating the environment where companies like OpenAI could successfully drive the memory prices to record levels.
bluecalm•24m ago