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.

Companies feel immense pressure to integrate AI to stay competitive, leading to massive spending. However, this rush means they lack the infrastructure to measure ROI, creating a paradox of anxious investment without clear proof of value.

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.

If AI is truly transformational, its greatest long-term value will accrue to non-tech companies that adopt it to improve productivity. Historical tech cycles show that after an initial boom, the producers of a new technology are eventually outperformed by its adopters across the wider economy.

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.

The AI investment case might be inverted. While tech firms spend trillions on infrastructure with uncertain returns, traditional sector companies (industrials, healthcare) can leverage powerful AI services for a fraction of the cost. They capture a massive 'value gap,' gaining productivity without the huge capital outlay.

Analysis shows that the themes venture capitalists and media hype in any given year are significantly delayed. Breakout companies like OpenAI were founded years before their sector became a dominant trend, suggesting that investing in the current "hot" theme is a strategy for being late.

Historical technology cycles suggest that the AI sector will almost certainly face a 'trough of disillusionment.' This occurs when massive capital expenditure fails to produce satisfactory short-term returns or adoption rates, leading to a market correction. The expert would be 'shocked' if this cycle avoided it.

While AI investment has exploded, US productivity has barely risen. Valuations are priced as if a societal transformation is complete, yet 95% of GenAI pilots fail to positively impact company P&Ls. This gap between market expectation and real-world economic benefit creates systemic risk.