Contrary to typical competitive behavior, major memory chip manufacturers intentionally limit their market share with any single customer. They prefer their clients, like Dell, to be multi-sourced from their competitors. This ensures a more resilient and stable supply chain for the entire ecosystem, prioritizing long-term stability over short-term dominance.
Related Insights
To prevent its suppliers from going bankrupt if contracts were cut, Apple mandated that no supplier could be more than 50% dependent on its business. This forced highly-trained manufacturers to find other customers, directly enabling the rise of sophisticated Chinese smartphone brands like Huawei and Xiaomi.
While network effects drive consolidation in tech, a powerful counter-force prevents monopolies. Large enterprise customers intentionally support multiple major players (e.g., AWS, GCP, Azure) to avoid vendor lock-in and maintain negotiating power, naturally creating a market with two to three leaders.
TSMC's "pure-play foundry" model, where it only manufactures chips and doesn't design its own, builds deep trust. Customers like Apple and NVIDIA can share sensitive designs without fear of competition, unlike with rivals Intel and Samsung who have their own chip products.
Even if Google's TPU doesn't win significant market share, its existence as a viable alternative gives large customers like OpenAI critical leverage. The mere threat of switching to TPUs forces NVIDIA to offer more favorable terms, such as discounts or strategic equity investments, effectively capping its pricing power.
NVIDIA's vendor financing isn't a sign of bubble dynamics but a calculated strategy to build a controlled ecosystem, similar to Standard Oil. By funding partners who use its chips, NVIDIA prevents them from becoming competitors and counters the full-stack ambitions of rivals like Google, ensuring its central role in the AI supply chain.
OpenAI is actively diversifying its partners across the supply chain—multiple cloud providers (Microsoft, Oracle), GPU designers (Nvidia, AMD), and foundries. This classic "commoditize your compliments" strategy prevents any single supplier from gaining excessive leverage or capturing all the profit margin.
NVIDIA's financing and demand guarantees for its chips are not just to spur sales, which are already high. The strategic goal is to reduce customer concentration by helping smaller players and startups build compute capacity, ensuring NVIDIA isn't solely reliant on a few hyperscalers for revenue.
NVIDIA's primary business risk isn't competition, but extreme customer concentration. Its top 4-5 customers represent ~80% of revenue. Each has a multi-billion dollar incentive to develop their own chips to reclaim NVIDIA's high gross margins, a threat most businesses don't face.
A key component of NVIDIA's market dominance is its status as the single largest buyer (a monopsony) for High-Bandwidth Memory (HBM), a critical part of modern GPUs. This control over a finite supply chain resource creates a major bottleneck for any potential competitor, including hyperscalers.
To mitigate its own risk, Apple's "50% rule" required suppliers to find other customers. This policy forced them to share advanced manufacturing processes co-developed with Apple, directly enabling the rise of Chinese smartphone rivals like Xiaomi and Huawei.
