Connect with us

News

Wall Street frets over Big Tech’s $200bn AI spending splurge

Published

on

Wall Street frets over Big Tech’s 0bn AI spending splurge

Big Tech’s capital spending is on track to surpass $200bn this year and rise even further in 2025, as anxiety grows on Wall Street about the returns on soaring investment in artificial intelligence.

The four biggest US internet groups — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google’s parent Alphabet — this week offered investors brief glimpses into the benefits they are seeing from their headlong rush into generative AI, arguing that it was boosting the performance of core services and helping to hold down operating costs.

But the stock market suffered a spasm on Thursday as investors looked past the imprecise benefits to focus instead on another big — and very measurable — jump in spending on chips and data centre infrastructure, as the AI race accelerates.

Capital expenditure at the four biggest hyperscalers grew more than 62 per cent on the year before, to about $60bn during the quarter, according to this week’s financial reports. Meta and Amazon were among those to point to further increases in spending next year.

Analysts at Citi forecast that the quartet’s total capital spending will hit $209bn this year, up 42 per cent on 2023. Citi estimates that data centres account for about 80 per cent of that total.

Advertisement

“What is the real benefit?” said Jim Tierney, a growth stock investor at AllianceBernstein, voicing a common concern. “All of these companies are spending a huge amount of money,” he added, with a resulting hit to profit margins that would become “more noticeable in 2025”.

One sign that demand for generative AI was starting to lift Big Tech’s growth rates came from the accelerating growth in the cloud divisions at Microsoft and Google.

But the optimism quickly dissipated when Microsoft went on to warn that cloud growth would slip back this quarter, largely because of supply constraints. Meanwhile, cloud market leader Amazon Web Services failed to hit the most optimistic hopes for an acceleration in its own growth, even as it lifted investors’ spirits with unexpectedly strong profit margins.

Companies that peppered their earnings calls this week with anecdotal and mostly vague assurances about AI returns included Alphabet, which said the new generative AI features in its search engine were increasing engagement and boosting usage. It also said a quarter of the software it produced was now written by AI.

Despite this, the growth in Google’ search volumes declined from the preceding quarter, said Tierney, raising a question about how strong the AI effect had been.

Advertisement

However, Microsoft said its revenue from AI was on the brink of hitting an annualised $10bn, reaching that milestone faster than any other business in its history. It also said that Copilot — an AI feature for which it charges a monthly fee of $30 per user — had experienced “the fastest growth of a new suite” yet seen in its M365 productivity software.

The $10bn figure was a rare disclosure of a hard revenue number and serves as an early proof-point of the real benefits that could start to flow from generative AI, said Brent Thill, an analyst at Jefferies.

But few other software companies have revealed anything about the effects of AI on their revenue, he added, leaving the stock market to fret. “It’s murky. And investors are freaking out about the costs,” Thill said.

Line chart of Share prices rebased showing Is Big Tech's AI rally running out of steam?

For its part, Meta told investors that AI had boosted returns from its advertising and improved engagement among users, while AWS said its “multibillion-dollar” AI business was growing at a rate of more than 100 per cent.

If anecdotes like this were encouraging but fuzzy, the rapidly rising spending on new data centres and equipment for AI was all too clear.

Facing a grilling from investors, executives at several companies claimed the massive increase in facilities to handle AI was closely tied to demand, and that capital efficiency would improve as the business increased in scale.

Advertisement

Executives at Amazon and Microsoft drew comparisons with the early days of the cloud computing business, when building and equipping fleets of data centres also caused spending to soar.

There are strong advanced buying signals from customers that make it possible to time investment spending closely to actual demand, said Amazon’s chief executive Andy Jassy. Microsoft’s chief financial officer Amy Hood said about half of the software company’s capital spending goes on server purchases, which could be timed closely to increases in demand.

Despite the claims of investment discipline, investors were left with the reality that the higher spending will hit Big Tech’s income statements next year, even as any revenue benefits are uncertain.

Meta, for instance, warned that 2025 would see “significant acceleration in infrastructure expense growth”, as its new fleet of data centres lead to higher depreciation charges and operating costs.

Changes in depreciation policies at Microsoft, Alphabet and Amazon in recent years will lessen the pain. All three have extended the useful lives of their data centre gear for accounting purposes, reducing the amount of depreciation they need to report each year.

Advertisement

Amazon said extending the useful lives of its servers by a year had lifted the profit margin in its cloud division by 2 percentage points in the latest quarter — the second time it has taken this step in two years.

But even after the moves to push depreciation charges further into the future, the pressure on margins from soaring spending on AI will be hard to avoid.

After a powerful two-year rally as earnings expectations for Big Tech have ratcheted steadily higher, this could indicate a turning point. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite closed 2.8 per cent lower on Thursday, with Microsoft, Meta and AI chipmaker Nvidia together shedding more than $400bn in value.

On Friday morning, shares in Meta and Alphabet were broadly flat, while Microsoft and Amazon were up, at 1 per cent and 7 per cent, respectively. Nvidia rose 3 per cent.

“Investors are left asking if the ‘beat and raise’ era [in quarterly earnings announcements] is over,” said Tierney. If so, the convulsion that passed through the market on Thursday could be a sign of rockier times ahead.

Advertisement

News

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Published

on

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.

She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.

Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.

But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”

Advertisement

“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”

As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.

She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.

The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

Published

on

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

An explosion and fire drew a large emergency response on Friday to a lumber mill in the Midcoast region of Maine, officials said.

The State Police and fire marshal’s investigators responded to Robbins Lumber in Searsmont, about 72 miles northeast of Portland, said Shannon Moss, a spokeswoman for the Maine Department of Public Safety.

Mike Larrivee, the director of the Waldo County Regional Communications Center, said the number of victims was unknown, cautioning that “the information we’re getting from the scene is very vague.”

“We’ve sent every resource in the county to that area, plus surrounding counties,” he said.

Footage from the scene shared by WABI-TV showed flames burning through the roof of a large structure as heavy, dark smoke billowed skyward.

Advertisement

The Associated Press reported that at least five people were injured, and that county officials were considering the incident a “mass casualty event.”

Catherine Robbins-Halsted, an owner and vice president at Robbins Lumber, told reporters at the scene that all of the company’s employees had been accounted for.

Gov. Janet T. Mills of Maine said on social media that she had been briefed on the situation and urged people to avoid the area.

“I ask Maine people to join me in keeping all those affected in their thoughts,” she said.

Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, said on social media that he was aware of the fire and explosion.

Advertisement

“As my team and I seek out more information, I am praying for the safety and well-being of first responders and everyone else on-site,” he said.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending