If you are active as an investor, you've had to spend at least some time evaluating where and how to participate in artificial intelligence: what to buy, what to avoid, and your reasons for doing so. And some of the implications are a bit startling for our thinking about computing-related hardware and software.
Generative AI might turn some computing “principles” upside down, while sustaining others. We have in recent decades seen software produce more value than hardware. In place of asset-light software, we might see value created in greater amounts by capital-intensive physical infrastructure.
Examples might include compute “as a service” providers; power providers; fiber networks and cooling solution providers. Returns might flow to a smaller number of suppliers able to afford the huge investments in capital-intensive, long-lived physical facilities underpinning AI compute operations.
Asset-light software might produce less value. Contrary to the recent “software eats the world” model, AI rewards scale and capital access.
And where value has been created by asset-light, fast-moving small teams, AI should favor larger providers with enough scale to navigate markets that are highly-regulated.
Regulatory compliance and trust barriers will tend to protect incumbents with scale.
Likewise, we might see a shift in acquisition value. Where merger and acquisition activity recently has been about “acquiring talent,” AI might force something of a shift to “acquiring assets.”
That might include sources of proprietary data, distribution capabilities and relationships or compute infrastructure and energy resources, rather than teams of people. So the “aqui-hire” strategy might have to be revised.
On the other hand, generative AI might support the current value of “distribution” or direct customer relationships. Much as distribution became more important once the cost of creating content dropped (social or legacy media), so, as content creation increasingly has a marginal cost of production near zero,
audience control captures value.
Much of the impact of computerization in general, and AI in specific, has been to emphasize value creation underpinned by scarcity, on one hand, and by scale on the other hand. This sort of “high and low” or “barbell” source of value squeezes out the middle (good but not great; too much labor to fully automate, not enough brand equity to command premium pricing).
But, in some cases, the changes will be dramatic. Where business strategy, until recently, was to “move up the stack” from lower levels to higher, the reverse could happen, in some instances.
Value and competitive moats might be created “down the stack” in infrastructure, rather than “up the stack” in apps. “Asset ownership” might produce more value than “asset-light” business models.
Value also might hinge, in some cases, on better applied judgment (figuring out the better models, sources of value and sources of scarcity (data, distribution, regulatory barriers). In at least some cases, that might mean a revenue model based on outcomes or performance.
No comments:
Post a Comment