Current M&A activity related to AI isn't targeting AI model creators. Instead, capital is flowing into consolidating the 'picks and shovels' of the AI ecosystem. This includes derivative plays like data centers, semiconductors, software, and even power suppliers, which are seen as more tangible long-term assets.
Related Insights
Because boards lack deep expertise in AI's seismic impact, they are pursuing scale-driven M&A. The goal is to accumulate diverse assets ('cards in a deck') to maintain flexibility and strategic options in an unpredictable, AI-driven future, rather than making specific bets on the technology itself.
Instead of selling software to traditional industries, a more defensible approach is to build vertically integrated companies. This involves acquiring or starting a business in a non-sexy industry (e.g., a law firm, hospital) and rebuilding its entire operational stack with AI at its core, something a pure software vendor cannot do.
Top AI labs like Anthropic are simultaneously taking massive investments from direct competitors like Microsoft, NVIDIA, Google, and Amazon. This creates a confusing web of reciprocal deals for capital and cloud compute, blurring traditional competitive lines and creating complex interdependencies.
Current AI investment patterns mirror the "round-tripping" seen in the late '90s tech bubble. For example, NVIDIA invests billions in a startup like OpenAI, which then uses that capital to purchase NVIDIA chips. This creates an illusion of demand and inflated valuations, masking the lack of real, external customer revenue.
In the current market, AI companies see explosive growth through two primary vectors: attaching to the massive AI compute spend or directly replacing human labor. Companies merely using AI to improve an existing product without hitting one of these drivers risk being discounted as they lack a clear, exponential growth narrative.
Instead of betting on which AI models or applications will win, Karmel Capital focuses on the infrastructure layer (neocloud companies). This "pick and shovel" strategy provides exposure to the entire ecosystem's growth with lower valuations and less risk, as infrastructure is essential regardless of who wins at the top layers.
Bitcoin miners have inadvertently become a key part of the AI infrastructure boom. Their most valuable asset is not their hardware but their pre-existing, large-scale energy contracts. AI companies need this power, forcing partnerships that make miners a valuable pick-and-shovel play on AI.
AI favors incumbents more than startups. While everyone builds on similar models, true network effects come from proprietary data and consumer distribution, both of which incumbents own. Startups are left with narrow problems, but high-quality incumbents are moving fast enough to capture these opportunities.
The narrative of a broad AI investment boom is misleading. 60% of the incremental CapEx dollars in the first half of 2025 came from just four firms: Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, and Microsoft. Owning or being underweight these four stocks is a highly specific bet on the capital cycle of AI.
Permira's AI strategy uses a clear framework: invest in the 'picks and shovels' of compute (data centers) and in applications with unique, proprietary data sets. They deliberately avoid the hyper-competitive model layer, viewing it as a scale game best left to venture capital and strategic giants.
