History shows that transformative technologies like aviation created immense societal value without concentrating wealth in a few companies. AI could follow this path, with its benefits being widely distributed through commoditization, challenging the multi-trillion dollar valuations of today's leading firms.

Related Insights

The assumption that AI will create trillions in corporate profit overlooks a key economic reality: only 1% of global GDP is profit above the cost of capital. Intense competition in AI will likely drive prices down, meaning the vast majority of economic benefits will be passed to consumers, not captured by a few monopolistic companies.

Like containerization, AI is a transformative technology where value may accrue to customers and users, not the creators of the core infrastructure. The biggest fortunes from containerization were made by companies like Nike and Apple that leveraged global supply chains, not by investors in the container companies themselves.

A technology like AI can create immense societal value without generating wealth for its early investors or creators. The value can be captured by consumers through lower prices or by large incumbents who leverage the technology. Distinguishing between value creation and value capture is critical for investment analysis.

The democratization of technology via AI shifts the entrepreneurial goalpost. Instead of focusing on creating a handful of billion-dollar "unicorns," the more impactful ambition is to empower millions of people to each build a million-dollar "donkey corn" business, truly broadening economic opportunity.

History shows that transformative innovations like airlines, vaccines, and PCs, while beneficial to society, often fail to create sustained, concentrated shareholder value as they become commoditized. This suggests the massive valuations in AI may be misplaced, with the technology's benefits accruing more to users than investors in the long run.

During major platform shifts like AI, it's tempting to project that companies will capture all the value they create. However, competitive forces ensure the vast majority of productivity gains (the "surplus") flows to end-users, not the technology creators.

While most predict AI will worsen inequality by replacing labor, the host suggests the opposite could occur. Since existing tech already concentrates wealth, AI as a new paradigm might disrupt this trend and diminish the relative value of capital, leading to a more equitable distribution.

The most profound innovations in history, like vaccines, PCs, and air travel, distributed value broadly to society rather than being captured by a few corporations. AI could follow this pattern, benefiting the public more than a handful of tech giants, especially with geopolitical pressures forcing commoditization.

In a high-impact AI scenario, massive productivity growth leads to gluts of goods and services. This causes prices to collapse, creating massive deflation. This deflation acts as a universal pay raise, dramatically increasing everyone's real wealth and purchasing power.

Contrary to the 'winner-takes-all' narrative, the rapid pace of innovation in AI is leading to a different outcome. As rival labs quickly match or exceed each other's model capabilities, the underlying Large Language Models (LLMs) risk becoming commodities, making it difficult for any single player to justify stratospheric valuations long-term.