Following Peter Thiel's theory, dominant companies like Nvidia publicly frame their market as "incredibly competitive" to avoid antitrust scrutiny. In contrast, companies in competitive markets pretend to have a monopoly to attract investors.
Related Insights
Early tech giants like Google and AWS built monopolies because their potential wasn't widely understood, allowing them to grow without intense competition. In contrast, because everyone knows AI will be massive, the resulting competition and capital influx make it difficult for any single player to establish a monopoly.
Jensen Huang's core strategy is to be a market creator, not a competitor. He actively avoids "red ocean" battles for existing market share, focusing instead on developing entirely new technologies and applications, like parallel processing for gaming and then AI, which established entirely new industries.
Large tech companies are buying up compute from smaller cloud providers not for immediate need, but as a defensive strategy. By hoarding scarce GPU capacity, they prevent competitors from accessing critical resources, effectively cornering the market and stifling innovation from rivals.
Despite powering the AI revolution, Jensen Huang's strategy of selling GPUs to everyone, rather than hoarding them to build a dominant AGI model himself, suggests he doesn't believe in a winner-take-all AGI future. True believers would keep the key resource for themselves.
Google training its top model, Gemini 3 Pro, on its own TPUs demonstrates a viable alternative to NVIDIA's chips. However, because Google does not sell its TPUs, NVIDIA remains the only seller for every other company, effectively maintaining monopoly pricing power over the rest of the market.
Instead of competing for market share, Jensen Huang focuses on creating entirely new markets where there are initially "no customers." This "zero-billion-dollar market" strategy ensures there are also no competitors, allowing NVIDIA to build a dominant position from scratch.
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.
The current AI landscape mirrors the historic Windows-Intel duopoly. OpenAI is the new Microsoft, controlling the user-facing software layer, while NVIDIA acts as the new Intel, dominating essential chip infrastructure. This parallel suggests a long-term power concentration is forming.
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.
Jensen Huang suggests that established AI players promoting "end-of-the-world" scenarios to governments may be attempting regulatory capture. These fear-based narratives could lead to regulations that stifle startups and protect the incumbents' market position.
