The AI race has been a prisoner's dilemma where companies spend massively, fearing competitors will pull ahead. As the cost of next-gen systems like Blackwell and Rubin becomes astronomical, the sheer economics will force a shift. Decision-making will be dominated by ROI calculations rather than the existential dread of slowing down.

Contrary to the popular belief that failing to adopt AI is the biggest risk, some companies may be harming their value by developing AI practices too quickly. The market and client needs may not be ready for advanced AI integration, leading to a misallocation of resources and slower-than-expected returns.

The current AI spending spree by tech giants is historically reminiscent of the railroad and fiber-optic bubbles. These eras saw massive, redundant capital investment based on technological promise, which ultimately led to a crash when it became clear customers weren't willing to pay for the resulting products.

Unlike prior tech revolutions funded mainly by equity, the AI infrastructure build-out is increasingly reliant on debt. This blurs the line between speculative growth capital (equity) and financing for predictable cash flows (debt), magnifying potential losses and increasing systemic failure risk if the AI boom falters.

While the current AI phase is all about capital spending, a future catalyst for a downturn will emerge when the depreciation and amortization schedules for this hardware kick in. Unlike long-lasting infrastructure like railroads, short-term tech assets will create a significant financial drag in a few years.

The massive capital rush into AI infrastructure mirrors past tech cycles where excess capacity was built, leading to unprofitable projects. While large tech firms can absorb losses, the standalone projects and their supplier ecosystems (power, materials) are at risk if anticipated demand doesn't materialize.

The AI buildout is forcing mega-cap tech companies to abandon their high-margin, asset-light models for a CapEx-heavy approach. This transition is increasingly funded by debt, not cash flow, which fundamentally alters their risk profile and valuation logic, as seen in Meta's stock drop after raising CapEx guidance.

Current AI spending appears bubble-like, but it's not propping up unprofitable operations. Inference is already profitable. The immense cash burn is a deliberate, forward-looking investment in developing future, more powerful models, not a sign of a failing business model. This re-frames the financial risk.

Tech giants are no longer funding AI capital expenditures solely with their massive free cash flow. They are increasingly turning to debt issuance, which fundamentally alters their risk profile. This introduces default risk and requires a repricing of their credit spreads and equity valuations.