Tim Cook’s Final Year?, Big Tech Horse Race, Anthropic’s Profitability Push

Channel: Alex Kantrowitz

Published at: 2025-12-01

YouTube video id: tluF-sFn4qQ

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tluF-sFn4qQ

Is Tim Cook about to step down from
Apple? Big tech stocks swing wildly as
the market tries to pick an AI winner.
And Anthropic is pushing toward
profitability. That's coming up right
after this. Welcome to Big Technology
Podcast. It's the first Monday of the
month and that means MG Seagler is here
with us to break down everything in big
tech. Today we're going to talk about
whether Tim Cook is on the verge of
retiring from Apple. We're going to look
at why big tech's market caps have swung
so wildly, seemingly from winner to
winner in the AI race. And then we're
going to look at a very interesting
development in the AI research lab race.
And that is the fact that OpenAI of
course is trying to reach AGI and it's
going to lose a lot of money on the way.
But Anthropic is actually taking a very
different tact and it's pushing towards
profitability. What does that mean?
We'll cover it all. And MG is here with
us today. MG, great to see you. Welcome
back. Great to see you, Alex. Uh, I wore
my ChateBT, if you could see it here, I
love ChatCBT shirt, which was made for
me way back when. Um, in part because
it's I guess it was the three-year
birthday of the uh of the service
yesterday, so I thought we'd be having a
party, but instead we'll just talk
through it, I guess.
>> Yeah. Well, we we can consider this a
festive moment here. It's amazing that
it's been 3 years. I thought the shirt
that you were going to be wearing was
the one that Ronan and I discussed on
Friday, which was uh my we're not Enron
shirt is bringing up burning questions
about whether we're Enron. Um,
>> of course, talking about Nvidia, but
we'll get to that in a moment. Uh,
>> it is interesting that the company that
has sort of been on the outs in this
generative AI race, and we'll start here
today, has been has been Apple. Uh, and
amid it all, Apple is looking extremely
good right now. Of course, technology
shifts take time to do what they do. Uh,
but Apple has not spent a lot of money.
It is about to turn in uh one of the
best quarters, if not the best quarter
of any business in history. Tim Cook has
said it's going to be Apple's best
quarter uh, you know, ever for the
company. They're on track to bring in
something like 137 billion in the fourth
quarter. The iPhone 17 is flying off the
shelves. They haven't spent all their
money on large language models and yet
the weirdest thing is happening. People
are talking about whether Tim Cook is
going to retire. Why is this happening?
Uh so I mean I think it's you know often
when at least over the past couple of
years given the AI fiasco as you're
talking about um obviously people have
been sort of mentioning Tim Cook and
retirement in the same breath with the
notion that it's a negative thing right
like that maybe it's time for him to go
because yeah they've missed the boat on
AI like is he really positioning the
company to be successful going forward
you know if you believe that this is the
most sort of fundamental technology
shift um certainly since probably the
iPhone. Um, you know, you could argue
that that Apple's not positioned well
right now, but the flip side, as you're
alluding to here, is starting to take
hold, right? Where it's it's looking now
like um, you know, you hear more and
more talk about unknown timets for when
certainly AGI is coming or super
intelligence or whatever we want to call
it these day this week. Um, but also
just, you know, the usefulness of AI.
You and I have talked about this a lot,
right? like what are people actually on
day-to-day and and especially in in
personal settings but also in work right
like there are use cases for sure but
how much is this fundamentally altering
businesses right now um and altering the
bottom lines of these businesses and I
think you know these these narratives
seem to eb and flow and right now we're
in a period where Apple in a weird way
is benefiting from again not having
spent uh the insane numbers on capex
that all of their main competitors are
Um, and so I think that the market has,
you know, sort of started to smile upon
that. And so, yeah, that's that's sort
of the argument for like why on the
positive side, this could be a good time
actually for Tim Cook to go because you
could argue that they might not be in a
better position as a company um as good
as they're about to be after the um, you
know, future earnings. as you note he
they already guided that it would be
record earnings and so uh if those are
in fact uh those numbers are hits in the
next quarter you know they're all
all-time high holiday quarter those are
always the best uh time of year for
Apple like you could make the case that
this would be sort of the most opportune
time for him to go personally if he's
thinking about going anytime soon anyway
which you have to believe he is he's 65
years old like these are natural
discussions that you have certainly as a
board they have fiduciary responsibility
to have this they've talked about you
They have a succession plan. They
haven't talked about exactly who it is,
but everyone knows that they have a plan
in place right now as they must as a big
company, as one of the most important
companies in the world. And so, again,
just looking at all of those factors, I
think that he has to be at least
thinking about it in his head and
thinking about the timing of it. You
know, you could say like, oh, well, he's
not he's not vain in that way or
whatnot, but everyone is legacy. This is
his this is his literal legacy and he's
been with the company forever. He wants
to leave it on, you know, the best terms
I think possible. And and it should be
noted like many people have noted this.
I've talked about this in the past. Ger
Mark German has noted this. John Gruber
has noted this. I don't think Tim Cook
is actually going to leave leave. I
think he would become Yeah. like
chairman. Um especially cuz I think it's
Art Levenson is right now the chairman
and he's hit that um unofficial but
official sort of 75 year um uh age uh
bracket where basically that's when
Apple for whatever reason historically
has asked um uh you know senior people
to step down and so Cook can slot right
in there and that would give him a nice
10-year run as as potential executive
chair. Yeah, I think this is very real
and there's a reason why I decided to
lead with this uh today is because, you
know, we may just be what seems like a
rumor in the newspaper, but then you
look a level deeper and you see that
there's there's actual movement here.
So, first of all, the FT put like what
four reporters on this story. It's not
like and and published it that way. So,
clearly they had some very good intel on
Cook's uh decision to move. And it
wasn't just like a story about how Cook
is going to leave. it was about how
Apple has ramped up succession planning.
Then the other indication here is that
Jeff Williams, the chief operating
officer of Apple, uh just retired, I
think it was last week or two weeks ago.
And it reminds me very much of what
happened at Amazon where uh Jeff Wilkkey
who is basically seen who's basically
seen as the number two to Bezos. He was
the CEO of Worldwide Consumer. Uh he
leaves fairly abruptly, right? And now
retrospectively it's very clear what
happened. There was a decision Bezos was
going to leave and these two executives
who had been waiting in the wings about
you know ready to become the CEO the
next CEO of Amazon uh both probably made
their case to Bezos. Uh one was Wilky,
one was Jasse and Andy Jasse won out and
Wilky's departure was about as clear a
signal as as you'll ever get that
something was up and Bezos was going to
leave. That's how I'm reading the
Williams departure here. I think he was
probably up against some people
internally, realized he wasn't going to
get the nod and decided to retire. He's
he has plenty of money, so he's going to
have a nice retirement. Uh but between
that departure and this mega byline
story in the FT, uh I could see Tim Cook
realistically
leaving in Q1 in 2026. I think that's a
real thing.
So the only push I would give on the on
the William Singh in particular is that
you know as as you know as everyone has
noted in these pieces the weird thing
there the dynamic there is that he's
only a very little bit younger than Tim
Cook is and so it it would be sort of
set up a weird situation where if Tim
Cook were to step down as CEO and hand
the reigns off to someone who's a year
younger than him like what's the real
long-term viability of that right like
you could say sure maybe he does run it
for 10 years or whatnot but I always
think that that was sort of an
interesting dynamic at play and and
certainly before I think before Mark
German I think it was last year sort of
first threw out the name John Turnis um
most people did assume that that you
know the COO uh Williams would end up
being the next in line because that's
historically how Apple's done it right
Tim Cook was COO before uh under Steve
Jobs and then he stepped in there and so
when he was appointed when William will
when Jeff Williams was appointed COO the
idea was that he was sort of the de
facto era parents that's not to say that
that was necessarily the case. I mean, I
haven't seen a lot of reporting on this,
but again, I I sort of view that that
age difference as as one thing, but I
also think it was interesting that they
had him sort of over time oversee
different things. Like famously, the
Apple Watch was the thing that he seemed
to be sort of, you know, spearheading
and and the thing that he would present
often in uh in the in the, you know,
yearly presentations and whatnot. So,
uh, while he clearly ran operations per
his title, like I do think that it was
sort of interesting the way that he was
set up, um, internally. And so, I'm not
sure, all I'm saying is I'm not sure
that it was like a a signal of him
leaving is necessarily the the white
smoke billowing out of uh out of Certino
that they've picked a new CEO. I just
think that that was sort of a natural um
recognition that it wasn't going to
happen. Um, and I think probably people
realized that for the past few years
that that wasn't likely to be the case.
We can talk through some of the other
candidates because there's many people
what part of the problem I think that
Apple's had over these years dating to
talking about the AI stuff in particular
is um how long tenured the people have
been. And that's not just about age.
It's about like how in you know in the
mind of Apple they are like it's hard to
sort of see outside when you've been
inside for that long. And Tis is is the
youngest of that group but he's in that
that mold too. Um, but anyway, so I
think you know the Williams thing is a
little bit different here, but I hear
you like certainly that did that was the
case with Amazon and when you were
talking about it that also reminds me
sort of Disney over the years, right?
Like they've historically had also COOs
who have um who have departed. I think
Kevin Mayer comes to mind as one um and
there have been a number of others. I
think Tom Tom Stags who also ended up
working with Kevin Mayer um I think
together on a project were two of the
people who were viewed to be sort of the
the top internal candidates and then
they obviously didn't get it. Um, and
that's an interesting analogy, too,
because uh that hearkens to the time
when when Bob Iger tried to step back
and handed over the reigns. Um, and it
didn't work out and he ended up having
to come back. And so, I think Tim,
someone like Tim Cook, who's obviously
close with with Bob Iger, close with
Disney, has to look at that situation,
the way that that was handed off and
really wants to avoid that. It was a
little bit of a extenduating
circumstance because of COVID times,
right? I think no one no one could have
known that the entire all of Disney
would get thrown into disarray in the
way that it had. But there was a lot of
question marks of whether Bob Cheek the
guy who he chose at that time was the
right person. Um but I think to your to
your exact point like once he got picked
a bunch of other people sort of yeah
stepped back. Um and so I think Apple is
looking at all of this stuff when it
comes to the succession planning
>> right and for Cook I I totally hear you.
There's a desire there will be a desire
to go out on top. I think that's why
you're seeing this rumbling and you you
would especially want to do it before
one of two things happens. One is uh
sort of the AI trade cuz what one of
these two is going to happen, right? The
AI trade is going to fall apart and it's
going to put the market into a fairly
deep correction or two it's going to
work and Apple's going to look, you
know, far behind.
>> Right. Right. Which is worse. Yeah. Uh
yeah. Yeah. Right. And that's totally
the your first point is is a good one
because you know we're talking about we
just mentioned like Apple's in a good
spot from a stock perspective right now
and sort of getting rewarded for not
having all the the capex spend that all
of their rivals are. But if the market
does correct there Apple's not going to
you know be immune to it. They might do
I think I think that they would do
better if the correction was caused by
you know AI concerned about AI spend
certainly I think that they would they
would hold up better but they're not
going to hold up you know just fine and
and that would not be a good time for
for Tim Cook to step away you know with
the stock down 20 30% or whatever from
from all-time highs.
>> Yeah. So if you're looking for the
perfect place to leave and you're Tim
Cook again I think Q1 might be it. I I'm
not again like we'll see what happens
but it would be a good time. And now I
wonder how do we judge uh Tim Cook in
particular? Um does it end when he when
he steps down or does it end when Apple
does run into that rough road that is
inevitably going to come for it? Um you
know again either the AI downturn or
lacking uh it's it AI works and it's
lacking in capabilities. I mean Cook has
obviously done a good job with the
company. He's grown it from a a few
hundred billion dollars to 4 trillion
today. The other side of it is I think
as a CEO you're also judged by how you
leave the place by by the you know Steve
Jobs for instance to continue on the
Apple front left uh Tim Cook with a road
map really and Cook crushed it. Um but
what road map does Tim Cook leave Apple
with if he leaves in Q1 and if Apple
does continue to lag behind and suffer
on the AI front is that a ding on kick
on Tim Cook's legacy even if he's not
there? Yeah, that and that was one um
that I didn't even mention this in in
the piece, but I do think um there was
some talk maybe a year ago or so that
the one thing Cook was really focused on
internally, there was there was a couple
reports to this to this notion that the
one thing he was focused on right now or
at the time was um was really meeting
the market for what Meta has done with
the with the Ray-B bands. So, he was
sort of going all in on trying to make
that potentially his last big product
unveil because, as we know, the Vision
Pro just hasn't sort of, you know, lit
the world on fire. Obviously, there's
there's really nothing to show right now
for on the AI front. And, you know, that
the new iPhones, those continue, just
the the current model that's that's
been, you know, playing out over the
past 15, 20 years. And so, um, is there
a new product that he can sort of go out
with a bang on? And you know, there was
some inkling again that that he might
think that the glasses are a thing. I
sort of discount that a little bit now
cuz I just view like yeah, they can make
like a nice product with that, but I
don't think it's going to be, you know,
an overnight game changer for Apple
where it would like necessitate, you
know, postponing a good time for
retirement necessarily, right? And to
your point like of leaving um sort of
the cupboard stocked as it were like if
uh if he has sort of this um yeah this
pipeline of new products coming out
there's also some you know apparently
some AI related products you know home
home uh uh inter interactive products
mounted iPad type devices and robotic
arms and things like that. if he has
some of that pipeline um lined up for
whoever steps in. Um that also much of
that pipeline does point again to why
John Turnis might make sense as as a lot
of it is hardware focused. But I also
think that that's a point that goes back
to um another post that I had written
recently where it just feels like it
feels like Apple now and I think the
stock market is also sort of learning
this a bit like they are not pivoting
but they have sort of reoriented the
messaging at least around like look for
as bad as they sort of whiffed on AI
there is no company that's in a better
position from a consumer hardware
perspective than Apple still right and
so Google tries Microsoft tries all
these companies try and no one can sort
of hold a candle to Apple when it comes
to certainly consumer hardware but you
could argue hardware in general like at
businesses you know lot so so many Macs
and everything and so again if he has
set the company up for that to be the
thing that they're going to double down
on hardware and everything that sets it
up well for someone like John Turnis if
he steps in and you know becomes the new
CEO
>> let me give the devil advocate the
devil's advocate position on turn here
uh I don't I don't think it's the right
choice uh he's the SP of hardware ware
engineering, you are a company that yes,
you've doubled down on the hardware side
of things and it's working out really
well. But if you look into the future,
the future of Apple is going to depend
on I think two really important things.
Well, I mean, I guess the given, so
let's say three. The given is that it
has to keep, you know, producing great
phones.
>> Um,
>> the the sec I don't I don't want to say
that's the easiest of the three, but it
might be because people are used to the
iPhone. The second of of those three
things is uh to continue to grow the
services business which has become sort
of the thing that underpins Apple's
valuation because it gives them this
software multiple as a hardware company
right basically investors see it as
something that you can continue to make
money from people after you sell them at
the phone therefore you're worth more
money on the stock market and number
three
>> to that point I would just add that at
some point in I think I've tried to
model it out and I've had chat GBT model
it out for me I think at some point in
next decade, services will pass the
iPhone as the largest business for
Apple. Just to your exact point.
>> Yeah. And then number three, just
piggybacking on services, it's going to
be navigating this AI thing. AI is not
going away. Like just because Apple is
in a good position now, and you have to
give it credit, right? It's it's
obviously gone and and worked a great
strategy for this present moment. That
AI shift is going to change. We have,
you know, Sam Alman and Johnny IV
working on a new device. And, you know,
is it going to be the the god device and
replace the phone? Maybe not. Uh but
you'll you'll find Apple trailing in
categories that it didn't expect to
trail in. Smart glasses for Meta is a
perfect example, right? They're catching
up to meta. Meta on their second product
here. You know, obviously the metaverse
didn't work out, but the smart glasses
seem like a real deal. So, do you want
to pick someone from hardware
engineering for that or do you want to
put somebody from the services side or
from a more software background to run
the company after Cook?
>> So, this one's a little trickier to talk
to. First of all, I don't know. I you
know I've I've met a lot of Apple
executives. I've not met John Turnis, so
I I can't really I can't speak from
personal knowledge. Not that I would
know him that well anyway, but like so
all I'm going off of is the reporting
here. All the reporting and everything
you hear from people who've worked at
Apple, they do it. You don't you rarely
I don't think I've ever heard a negative
word about him, which is good. There can
be a, you know, flip side to that, which
is, you know, that that maybe he's he's
not like um a great wartime CEO or
something like that if he were to be put
in that place. But again, that's all
that's all just trying to extrapolate
out what um what there could be in
downside scenarios. Remember, when when
Cook took over, there were many, many
concerns about him taking over for Steve
Jobs because he famously isn't a product
guy, right? He ran operations and there
was a lot of talk of like, well, does
this mean innovation is dead at Apple?
And I mean now, you know, all these
years later, 15 plus years later, you
could say like as you just did, like
basically like look, Steve Jobs left a
great a great road map for Cook to
execute on. And he executed on just
about probably better than any single
person on earth could have. And and I
think that, you know, that's uh that's
why the company is valued as it is right
now. And he took the iPhone to a
completely new heights and brought in
services and all of that. But you could
also argue like as the operations guy,
he was just good at knowing what to
execute and it went from doing the you
know the um supply chains and and all of
that that he had been uh focused on to
doing the entire company. And so the
question then for Turnis would be a
similar thing like look he's he's been
at the company I think for something
like 25 years like almost half of his
life which is wild. And it the question
is then like is all of that internal
knowledge and institutional knowledge
that he's built up is that allow him to
be in you know the the right place right
time to basically yeah continue not only
executing on the stuff that that Cook
has been able to sort of orchestrating
the entire company and stepping up one
level to go from just you know
orchestrating all of hardware and
obviously he's leveled up throughout the
years to to be able to take on new
responsibilities and that's you have to
believe that that's a big part of the
reason why they think that he's
potentially the guy to be able to do
this now. But to your point, it's the
new stuff that's that's going to be the
key to it. It's the AI. It's um any new
devices that come in. And Cook, you
know, did a great job stewarding Apple,
but would we say that he's done a great
job with the new device stuff? I mean,
the Apple Watch certainly, I think, is
is, you know, a bonafide hit at this
point, but it's not something that's at
the iPhone level certainly. And you
could argue that that's totally unfair
that nothing was ever going to be at
that level. But, you know, he's had a
few swings and I think he he they've
taken a while, but he hit with um the
Apple Watch um and missed as of right
now with Vision Pro. Um and then
services obviously came up under him. He
was right to focus on that. But it's
largely like Eddie Q from all accounts
who's in charge of that, right? And so,
you know, he tked the right lieutenant
with doing it and that's exactly it
sounds like what Turnis is going to do.
And that just speaks to Okay, so say
Turnis is elevated to be CEO. Who's in
charge of AI? like they need someone in
charge. Right now it's been John
Gandria. Um I think everyone if
everything you read is basically like
similar to the um the Jan Lun situation
at Meta like it sort of feels like the
writing's on the wall there like he will
probably not be there for for very much
longer unless he were to fully step into
just a full-on research thing which is
what Lun did right for a long time
before he stepped back. And so, um, who
actually steps in to lead this? And
that's why you and I have long talked
about the the M&A, uh, side of things.
And it's like I I still think the
biggest argument to be made for Apple
doing some M&A there is just to get the
right team and leadership in place to
sort of shift that mentality because
that will be key to turn us if you
believe that AI is uh is one of those
three pillars as you note like who is
actually leading that. Is it Federigi?
can he step up and do it um in in full
um you know is it uh Mike Rockwell who
came over it sounds like from from
Vision Pro to be able to step in to try
to correct the series stuff like is it
one of those people or is it someone
from the outside? I tend to believe it
has to be someone again from the outside
just because of how new and how
different this is and it's not it seems
unlikely that it would be an Apple lifer
who sort of is the one to best corral AI
but you know maybe that we'll see how
that how they are thinking about that.
Okay, then lastly on Apple or maybe
second to last because I want to talk
about the phones before we end the
segment, but um let's just talk about
this argument that Apple was wise for
not, you know, plowing a lot of money
into experimental
uh large language model research uh that
may not pay off for them. I have been
skeptical of that argument. It's like
you don't want to, you know, sort of pat
somebody on the back for like not giving
uh their best shot at, you know, trying
to develop the next level cutting edge
technology. However, the other side of
it is uh maybe as we've seen, you know,
we saw Google overtake open AAI in some
areas um and Apple's going to partner
with Google. uh maybe you do need to
hand it to them and say you know what
not everybody needs to develop their own
LLM and oh they won't have as much
control but uh their their costs look a
lot better and it's ultimately about
productizing this technology not
building the fundamental layer itself. I
mean that seems like the best argument
for Apple in this case. What do you feel
about that? I think it's a great point
and I I mean in my head I sort of think
that that one part the partnership with
Google in particular is what is leading
to the sort of resurgence. Obviously, we
know Google's stock itself is res is is
resurgent um on the back. It sounds
like, you know, mainly of Gemini 3, but
um I think that Apple's resurgent in
part because I I think the market not
only is recognizing, you know, the
hardware side of the story again and not
dinging them for uh for the capex spend
like they are with Meta and and a few
other of the players right now, but it's
also again that they're they recognize
the problem that they had and they were
able to buy these reports. you know,
nothing official yet, but recognized
that they could make the best
partnership possible with Google, who is
obviously their longtime partner when it
comes to search and and once that
basically partnership got the okay, you
know, the deacto okay from the Justice
Department to keep going, um I think,
you know, they basically, you know, from
again the reporting, they they were able
to figure out a way to to work out a new
deal where um if Gemini is powering, you
know, the new Siri that they launch um
early next year. That seems like sort of
the best of both worlds, right? you got
the best hardware um and now all of a
sudden you have the best AI powering
what has been the historic weak point of
um of Apple's operating system and
certainly going forward if you believe
again in in any part of the AI narrative
like if they have what is considered now
if not the best you know in the top two
sort of models for running uh all of AI
certainly consumerf facing AI then uh
Apple's well positioned to do that and
you as you're as you're noting you can
make an argument that by sitting back
and waiting sort of they ultimately made
the right decision. Now the question
still I think is going forward is that
the right decision and this is why I've
long thought like um in sim in a similar
vein to the Apple maps uh scenario which
hopefully not executed to the same way
but I think that they they learned their
lesson the hard way that time um but I
do think that they'll continue to work
on their own models internally and then
you know they can but this Gemini
potential partnership allows them buys
them a lot of time to basically be able
to swap in their models and they don't
have to do it in even a big one fell
swoop. they could just, you know, more
and more sort of do these these
peacemeal um, you know, swaps and and
take on more responsibility with their
own internal stuff. Um, and, you know,
as long as, uh, they can continue to,
uh, massage that relationship with
Google to be okay with with that sort of
interesting dynamic, then you're right
that they're in a good spot if these
reports, you know, end up being
accurate.
>> Okay. So, lastly on Apple, it's Cyber
Monday. Of course, we're in the middle
of what we said at the beginning is
going to be uh the best quarter in Apple
history. And if it isn't, that's going
to maybe it really is time for Tim Cook
to retire. Um, but a lot of people are
probably out there thinking, "Hey, do I
want to upgrade to this new iPhone 17?"
Uh, we also know that the iPhone Air uh
is basically a massive flop. They're
they cut back production dramatically.
It doesn't seem like they're working on
a next edition. So, I am just curious to
hear your perspective. Do you have the
17? Uh what's what model do you have?
Have you been enjoying it? And uh what
do you think people should be uh keeping
in mind as they think about making their
holiday purchase? And I'm saying this
somewhat uh uh you know, from a position
of self-interest cuz I have the 15 Pro.
I really like it. Uh I thought I was
going to skip the 17, but man, I'm
leaning towards going out and upgrading.
>> Yes. So I got the 17 Pro Max. Um I can
hold it up here. I got the the special
orange one with my little beautiful.
>> Um,
>> no, it's it's a great looking phone. I I
I thought the the the color would be a
little weird um given how orange it is,
but I love it. I think it's great. Um,
and I I was always going to be though a
Pro and in particular a Pro Max guy
because I care most about battery life
and and that's obviously a big ding
against the Air, right? like that you
need the the extra battery the battery
pack add-on to be able to sort of get
full battery life capacity out of the
device. Um, I think, you know, Apple now
has a sort of a track record of trying
to launch these new sort of adjacent
arms of the iPhone dating back to even
the the iPhone 5C, if you remember that.
Like, right, that was the first colorful
iPhone. Um, and it it looked very
pretty. Um, but it just didn't seem to
sell very well. And so, they they only
had sort of one one go of it. And then
um you know, fast forward a bit, they
obviously tried to reintroduce the
iPhone mini um after a lot of people
seem to be clamoring for that. But
again, by by most accounts that you hear
and and obviously played out in the fact
that Apple discontinued it, like these
just weren't selling very well. And you
might say like the the iPhone um Plus
lineup uh was also in that camp, but
it's basically like Apple keeps trying
to do these adjacent um new arms of the
iPhone and for whatever reason, they
just don't take hold. I think the iPhone
Air in particular was always going to be
weird. I mean, I wrote about this well
before when it was still just rumored
that I felt like it would be sort of a
weird in a way in between phone because
it's not the highest of the high-end of
the iPhone, right? And it's not the
cheapest, most affordable as Apple would
prefer, we say, uh, version of the
iPhone. And so, it sort of sits in the
middle. Yes, it it sort of looks nice
and it feels nice in hand. Um, you know,
I don't have one, but I used it in store
and and it's a great feeling phone, but
it's again sits in this weird spot. it's
like too too expensive um to be sort of
a mass consumer you know device I think
and it's not fast enough and doesn't
have the battery life and the camera
system that sort of you know would be I
think required now uh table stakes for
the top of the line and so they just put
it in this weird position. I do think it
was interesting that they they sort of
tied it more directly to like the pro
lineup, right? It has a faster chip and
and sort of they're trying to angle it
that way. Um, but again, I I view it as
this like awkward in between uh device
right now. And um, you know, whether or
not it was actually delayed, I think
that there's no question that if it was
a major hit that Apple would be moving
heaven and earth trying to get a second
iteration out there, right? Like if it
was as popular as uh as the MacBook Air
became, right? Like Apple has famously
held on to that branding because that
device is so popular. Um, and they were
able to do that. But I I I'll say that
and then I say it the same in the same
breath that the uh the iPhone the
MacBook Air did not start out as super
popular, right? It started out as a way
too expensive sort of yeah uh cool demo
with with Steve Jobs pulling it out of
the envelope and and all of that. And so
uh it had to work its way into that. And
so maybe Apple thinks that they can do
that again with the with the iPhone air,
but as of right now it just hasn't taken
off obviously is the way they would
hope. So, you like what I hear you
saying here is is you like the 17. No
looking back on that one.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. So, the 17 Pro and the
Pro Max version that I have, but even
the Pro Pro regular, the smaller version
is just it's you know what? It's the
fastest one. It's got the best camera.
It's got the best battery life. Like,
and if you're two two or two generations
back, I would definitely upgrade if I'm
if I'm you.
>> Okay. Well, here I go after this. make
my trudge my way over to the app the
Apple store and say once again
>> can I ask you one one uh tangential
question that you hit upon but we didn't
really talk through because I'm
interested in your perspective so you
noted that the FT report that talked
about job uh Tim Cook retiring had four
reporters on it when I read that and I
saw that it's like a 300word piece and
I'm just like okay so either these four
reporters all talked to the same source
and they all have like and they just all
decided to work together on this thing
or they have four different sources or
they have three different you some
mixture of different sources on this,
but like you've worked in a newsroom.
I've worked in a newsroom way back in
the day and Techrunch was a little bit
sort of different, much more independent
I would say than uh independent operator
than than sort of working newsroom
style. And so I'm curious like when you
see that, what what is what does that
signal to you? Typically the way those
big by line stories work is one reporter
who may or may not be the main beat
reporter gets the tip and then three
people who are you know and and it
becomes seen as such a big story by the
mast head uh that three people who uh
have decent sourcing within the company
basically open up their rolodexes and
call every single person they know
within the company and they'll get a by
line even if they didn't really
contribute very much cuz they put the
time in. Um, that's my best guess. What
do you think it was all about?
>> No, I think you're I think you're
probably exactly right. I mean, you
know, again, I was thinking through
like, do all these people have the same
source? But I think you're exactly
right. I think it's one person has, you
know, got a tip about this specific
incident and then the other three were
sort of used because they need to get a
sec at least a second source on this.
And so, you know, the fact that they uh
though have four reporters on it
suggests that they got more than a
second source. um and that they maybe
have a few sources at least about people
who are talking about this notion. But
it's interesting in the context that
Mark German, who obviously, as we talked
about, was the person who originally
reported on the turn of succession and
and you know, Cook potentially
eventually stepping down, has pushed
back pretty hard against the FT report,
right? Like he sort of called them out
in his newsletter and saying like um I I
don't know where they're getting the
timing of this. Like certainly as we as
you and I just talked about like you
know this is in the air that this is
going to happen at some point just given
Cook's age and and everything else. Um
but there's no indication that he's
heard and obviously he's by uh you know
by all accounts the best sourced Apple
uh reporter at this point um that he's
heard that there's anything but I also
think like his sources with an like if
this is a if this is really a discussion
that's being had like the amount of
people who would be talking about this
internally has got to be pretty small um
because this is like a this is a board
decision. This is a Tim Cook. This is
first and foremost a Tim Cook decision,
right? He's making this call. No one's
going to force him out at this point.
Certainly not at this this point of the
stock. Um and no one's going to push him
out regardless. He's been so successful.
Um and so this is really his decision.
And so I don't know what to make of the
whole back and forth though between
these conflicting stories. It's
interesting that the FT hasn't sort of
um followed up at all. They didn't
certainly didn't issue a a correction,
but also hasn't, you know, hasn't
doubled down as far as I know on it. And
so yeah, it's sort of just hanging out
there um as it is.
>> Yeah, it's puzzling to me. I mean, Tim
Bradshaw is the first uh by line on that
and he's he's a really good reporter who
does cover Apple.
>> Uh maybe not as the beat reporter, but
covers it enough that maybe somebody
whispered something to him. So, uh it it
is always fascinating how these things
develop. Uh but um again, like even
German had a story talking about how
Turnis was the air apparent. So maybe
the FT kind of caught the scent there
and decided to go full on
>> in and try to try to see what
>> what the story was cuz even if like they
they have like a successor internally
that could be like you know if they went
from company that didn't have a
successor to one that does now you could
you know write the headline that they've
ramped up succession planning and you
know maybe make it seem more than it is
but I still think there's enough there
that that this is very real.
>> Yep. Okay. All right, let's let's head
to break. Before we go to break, I just
wanted to quickly take a moment to thank
to to thank TechMe. If you go to TechMe,
you probably have seen that Big
Technology Podcast is one of the
featured podcasts on techme.com.
Uh we definitely thank them for doing
that. TechMe, of course, is a great
website to keep up with the latest tech
news. Uh always the best and most
important stories are up at the top
there, and it's a great way to keep up
with things when you're not listening to
Big Tech podcast, of course. All right,
we'll be back right after this. And
we're back here on Big Technology
Podcast with MG Seagler of Spyglass. You
can find Spyglass at spyglass.org.
One of my favorite publications.
Definitely recommend recommend you check
it out and sign up for the great
newsletter uh and become a member of the
site. It's great stuff. Uh in spy glass
over the past month, MG, you wrote about
how we are in this middle of this like
very volatile moment for big tech market
caps. uh every week it seems like
there's a new big tech company that has
the crown for the most valuable company
on earth. Uh Nvidia has played that role
for a long time. Microsoft has played
that role for a long time. Apple has
played that role for a long time. And
Google, you know, has surpassed
Microsoft and seems like it might be
making its way there, especially as the
company um starts to potentially sell
its TPUs, the TPU chips, uh to other
companies like Meta, probably cutting
into some of Nvidia's lead. Let me ask
you a question about this volatility. I
mean obviously if you think about all
these companies it's uh you know three
out of the four that I just mentioned
are big on the AI trade and Apple is you
know Apple is Apple. Um do you think the
volatility that we've seen has just been
uh the stock market trying to figure out
who the winner is going to be in this AI
race and sort of plowing money from you
know one to to the other. Is that the
nature of the horse race here?
>> I think at a at the highest level yes.
Um I I think that that's roughly
correct. Um it is fascinating how it
felt like even just a few months ago
that Nvidia was basically running away
with the game, right? They hit the 5
trillion valuation. Um only I think
Microsoft at that point was at four.
Google not too long ago. I wrote about
this like how I felt like they were
significantly undervalued which of
course proved to be correct by the stock
market. But it was it's sort of it's
nothing uh you know that anyone couldn't
have sort of thought about just looking
at what they have on their plate beyond
even AI with Whimo and everything else
coming up. Um but Google Google was like
you know valued at half of uh of
certainly Nvidia and maybe even of
Microsoft at one point just a few months
ago and now they've come roaring back
and Apple as you note Apple's been in
the front of the pack for most of the
past decade. Um and uh now all of a
sudden as you're noting and you know as
I wrote a little bit about they've they
basically are collapsing up at that top
echelon between those four companies and
it's just a matter of like what the
current uh reports and and and narrative
is around uh in particular AI uh it
seems like will push one of them to the
lead. Um, it does feel like that Google
has that momentum right now based off of
exactly what you're talking about with
sort of the reports about, you know,
potentially selling TPUs and that
obviously has a direct impact on Nvidia.
Um, if it feels like that they're going
to maybe not lose the crown of that
business, but certainly if they get if
they get some pressure on the business
for the first time um, from Google,
that's going to take some sheen off of
that. There's other external things that
play like you know the reports that uh
that Warren Buffett that Bergkshire
Hathaway took a giant uh stake in in
Google I think helped propel them even
further right um and the fact that uh
Apple's still I think uh Bergkshire
Bshire's uh largest holding but they've
been trimming back and so all of these
things are at play when it comes to yeah
that jockeying of the stock price but um
Nvidia I know you and Ron John talked
about it uh on Friday but it was like
you know their their sort of PR our curl
fluffles now are are sort of not helping
uh their stock. I think just not helping
in general the um the feeling of
confidence around uh the way that uh
that people are feeling about it. Um but
before that happened and the reason why
that they feel the need to to sort of
come out with this this PR strategy is
because famously of course Michael Bur
one of the most famous if not the most
famous short seller of all time uh has
come out against them. And so, yeah,
there's there's a lot of uh a lot of
this sort of internal jockeying about
how they'll uh how they'll all play out.
And then and then there's Microsoft
who's sort of um also getting dinged,
but also getting buoyed a bit, but you
know, sort of some some level of the
OpenAI relationship now being more
settled, I think, has, you know, settled
their stock a bit more now. But this is
all just going to continue to be like in
this it feels like in this um in this
washing machine all these companies
getting tumbled around for who's in
first, who's in fourth and whatnot.
>> All right, let me give you my hot take
about what's happening here. Uh and this
is sort of a hybrid with something that
Josh Brown has has wrote about um
downtown Josh Brown about how we're in a
horse race right now. Uh but here's kind
of how I see it. So Apple of course was
you know preai the most valuable company
in the world for a very long time. Uh
maybe they swap places with like Saudi
Araco. So we would have to say like
right
>> most valuable publicly traded company
but let's just say most valuable company
or
>> you know excluding Saudi Aramco at like
one moment. Okay. So then chat GPT
happens and all of a sudden you see
people wanting to bet on OpenAI and the
way that they do that is through Nvidia
and through Microsoft and Nvidia was the
one that's the mostly direct most uh
direct correlation to OpenAI because if
OpenAI is predicated on scale both for
training and inference NVIDIA which is
the only one supplying them the chips uh
was going to be super important and then
Microsoft secondarily you would put M
you would put Microsoft there because
Microsoft has again like an unbelievable
investment in OpenAI an intrinsic link
uh to open AAI through like the IP
rights um and and power over open AI uh
for a very a variety of reasons. So
there was this moment where Nvidia and
Microsoft surge ahead because people
believed that this AI thing was going to
be real and they believed that OpenAI
had a lead that was really going to be
tough to challenge because the company
came out with better models, better
products um and and was just like the
runaway favorite to effectively in the
minds of investors the best it had the
best chance of doing this straight shot
to AGI or at least some economically
valuable um economically valuable AI
that that was going to be tough to
match. But what we've seen recently, so
now that we've we've seen like Nvidia
and Microsoft fall and uh and Google
surge, um is that I don't think it's
that Google has surpassed uh OpenAI. uh
maybe in some areas it has but it's we
we are now in the first moment where the
state-of-the-art models are really
commoditized where you could argue that
Google and Anthropic and OpenAI have
models that are um it they they stand
together. You know, some might be better
for some activities and some might be
worse for other activities, but you're
not going to say that OpenAI rules the
world the way that it did a couple years
or even a year ago. And that's where you
see what you're seeing now really is not
necessarily the fall of OpenAI and the
fall of Nvidia or the rise of Google.
It's this moment where we see
commoditization happen amongst the
models and in some cases amongst the
hardware because of the TPU thing and
and when you see commoditization happens
the economics of AI shift. So, I'm
curious what you think about it and I
I'm curious what you think, you know, if
you agree with my premise that we are
starting to see this commoditization.
Um, what do you think the economic
impacts of the commoditization really
are?
Yeah, I would frame it's s the taking
what you're saying and framing it
slightly differently is that um if you
believe all of that to be true that
you're that you're laying out there
maybe investors are just looking at it
like look at the end of the day then if
that's the case who has the sort of best
position and best business model for all
of this you know future going forward
and I think it would be hard to argue
against Google just given that they own
not only Google cloud you on which a lot
of models and everything are running but
they the TPUs as you're noting obviously
they have this search business and Whimo
and all these other things whereas the
other companies if if AI is starting to
um commoditize in some way you know
Nvidia their business potentially is
impacted in a good way in some cases but
for the most part it's probably going to
be looked at as like well the arms race
is sort slowing down a bit and that's
going to be bad news for Nvidia at the
highest level because you won't need to
necessarily buy you know the absolute
top-of-the-line um andor on the flip
side as we're talking about if Google's
able to sort of ramp TPUs to get close
that was part of obviously the messaging
from Nvidia was uh we're a generation
ahead right in their in their sea
statement which was obviously explicitly
uh meant to say that like yeah Google's
doing great work but they're not where
we are right now But to your, you know,
to your question, yeah, like so Nvidia
is obviously in a position where they
need the AI revolution to sort of keep
going as it has been in order to keep up
the just the incredible growth that
they've seen, including last quarter,
which was incredible. Um and then uh you
know the other play players uh Microsoft
to your point about Open AI they also
obviously have a great underlying
business um but they don't have quite I
I don't think as as viewed as all of the
pieces that Google necessarily has right
now um and when people are looking at
all the different um areas that they can
they could potentially monetize for
future um you know would be profits and
then Apple is you know the wild card
which is why I think Apple you know we
talked about um not not getting hit by
the capex stuff and everything, but
Apple is, you know, about to they're in
second place right now. They're probably
going to overtake Nvidia at some point.
And then it's just a question of exactly
what we were talking about in the
succession stuff, like what is the
future story there? So like it could be
you know the situation where Apple
basically moves into first place again
for a set period of time depending on
what's going on uh within the AI you
know overall fra framework and narrative
stuff and then eventually you know
Google passes it um and then depending
on where we are again in that cycle. Um
but again to go back to the exact
question I do think that if this if we
are sort of working towards yeah more of
this commoditization that's the state
that we're in right now and I think
that's why those those four companies
are getting bunched up more than just
Nvidia running away or you know earlier
when Microsoft was running away a bit um
the the wild card there the next step
might be you know next gen generation
models we're hearing a lot of people
talk about world models now right Leon
Lun of course famously has has stepped
away from meta to work on that but also
um Ilyas that's all he basically talked
about um you know in his in his recent
interviews and um and yeah it's
basically like this is the new thing and
even Demis has been talking about world
models right and so like this is the
entire now thing if this becomes the new
narrative that will obviously be the
next thing that potentially um sort of
switches up or shakes up those companies
again is h how integrated or not they
are with that with that um lineup.
>> Yeah. I just wonder I mean if if if
world models really is the next thing
that's such we're such at we're at such
a early point on that front.
H I don't know that we might have a long
stall before anything if that approach
even works. No one really knows.
>> Yeah. And we might see I mean obviously
we're going to have Elon Musk try to
come back into this this uh equation
right and he's already been talking
about how excuse me the um you know his
his robots are optimists are going to be
the biggest business ever not just like
the big you know biggest business of
Tesla the biggest business of all time
for anything ever and so you know he's
hyping that up to no end because I think
that he probably views this as like yeah
that's the next sort of the world models
are a part of that and uh you know we go
into robotics and if that's the next
multi multi-t trillion dollar sort of
business opportunity uh then Tesla has a
shot to get into that race you know and
make it a five a five horse race
obviously Meta uh would hope to be the
one to get also into that race and and
Amazon we haven't even talked about um
you know being sort of sitting there I
think what a mere trillion dollars back
or whatever they are at the moment from
sort of the rest of the pack and so uh
all of that comes in
>> yeah it does also seem like Meta is is
sort fighting the last war on this where
they're like they've assembled a super
team to build LLMs. But let me ask you
this. So, so let's say that's where we
are. We're sort of, you know, I don't I
don't want to say petering out on
progress with large language models, but
maybe reaching some form of plateau. Um,
and and the models are commoditizing.
Uh, who's who do you bet on? Uh, who
would you bet on? Would you bet on, and
this is again using Josh Brown's like
dichotomy here, the sort of or the Open
AI cinematic universe where you have
like Open AI and Microsoft and Oracle or
the Google universe where you have you
know, I don't know, and some others.
>> Yeah. I mean, if I if I was like
actually betting uh you know, money on
these companies, I would do what these
companies are doing and all bet on each
other. uh hedge your bets not
>> the circular financing actually makes
sense in this front
>> that's how I would do it but uh if
you're asking me to actually bet to pick
one winner of it uh I do you know and I
you know I I worked at Google for a long
time for Google's venture arm um you
know haven't been there for a while so
just to disclose that but um but I do
think that Google's um just given all of
the things that they have it does feel
like the quote unquote beast has awoken
and I feel like that they're in the best
position right now to be able to to
capitalize on all of this stuff quite
literally. Um I think that again though
this I I do buy into the notion and I'm
far from an expert on uh you know on AI
models, but I do buy into the notion the
high level notion that it's going to
take more than where we are with LLMs to
be able to take us to AGI or whatever
you want to call it the next the next
phase of where we're going. And so if
you believe that, it's really a question
of who do you think is best positioned
as one of these companies to take
advantage of that. To your point, Meta
feels like they're they're literally
letting that ship sail in in Yan Lun and
they'll invest or whatever in his
startup, but they obviously made their
bet in the opposite way. Um Apple
that is sort of a off to the side. Um
but uh Amazon uh you know, they're
apparently working on their own
internal. I mean, they've been working
on their own own internal models, but
obviously they have the giant Anthropic
bet. Um, but it doesn't feel like, at
least from there's been no leaks of
anything that Anthropic is sort of
really primarily focused on, you know,
sort of the next world models and and
whatnot. Um, and so again, I think like
the fact that Demis has been out there
talking a lot about this, like you know
that he's thinking even if it's not
world models, there's some other what's
next coming up that that I think that
they're heavily thinking about.
Microsoft to me it also feels a bit like
they're on the last battle. They're
stuck there right now. Um just from you
know public things that you hear and
reports and so it feels like um it's
either we talked about this before like
with with you know the the history of
open AI it does feel like that they've
made their AGI or bus bet and then it's
just a question of like can they find
more and more people to give them enough
capital because they're sort of now at
this weird point where they don't have
you know Microsoft Yeah. owns 27% of the
company, but they're not their main
capital partner anymore. Um, nor are
they even their real main technology
partner sort of going forward. And so
they need to like continue to bring in
just an insane amount of capital whereas
Google is insanely profitable. And so,
you know, and they have the pieces in
place to do it. So, you know, as much as
I hate to to to bet on a, you know,
three plus trillion dollar company
against a quote unquote startup, uh, it
just feels like there's there's a window
of opportunity here. I think OpenAI,
when I go back to it, what they've
always done the best of, um, is on the
product side, right? They've always done
a great job being able to productize AI,
and I think that that's what's directly
led to their consumer success. And um
yeah, Google is is eating into that a
bit now.
You had a a piece about this talking
about how Google's like actually been
able to build some uh delightful
products whether that's notebook LM uh
>> which by the way I have to say notebook
LM the team there did tweet like uh
here's a holiday recipe and like
somebody like saw that they had like
just taken a recipe they they were doing
holiday infographics and someone saw
that they just literally jacked a recipe
from some website indexed by Google and
put it in a nice format and said this is
AI and it's just like Oh, come come on.
Like you can't do that. But um but
there's also this dynamic view that you
actually wrote about which I I couldn't
find. Is it just for like the Google the
the prousers of Gemini? But uh you
basically are able to I don't even know
how to explain it. It's this interactive
web page or something that you can
create via a prompt with Gemini. It's a
very cool product.
>> Yes. So one thing it's not on mobile
yet. Um so I don't know if that's where
you were looking on desktop.
>> Um but yeah, I am a pro uh pro
subscriber. So maybe that was it. and
it's in it's in labs so it's not
officially rolled out but it was just
available maybe I'm in some bucket AB
test for it um but uh yeah it was in the
dropdown um and it was it's near nano
banana you know when you do the drop
down and pick uh if you want to make an
image you could also pick to make this
this type of presentation dynamic view
again awful name but it's such a cool
output that it does I give the examples
in in my post one of them was uh was
explaining the end of the movie Heat uh
the the famous '90s Michael Man movie to
me um and it made this incredible just
interactive um output which again it's
sort of when I'm explaining it it sounds
like rudimentary but you got to see this
thing um when you do it and and you
could do it for anything and it
basically takes what um you know the
output would be in a in a text um format
uh from a regular out uh query on on
Gemini and and it puts it into this sort
of interactive model including like
making just these like incredibly
intuitive and like fun things like I did
one for the end for you know explaining
in the movie Interstellar to me and it
like makes a a button where you can turn
on sort of background mute music that's
in the style of interstellar and then
while you do that you can calculate uh
like time deation uh when you're going
around a black hole and it's like it's
all this like just really fun
interesting uh way to sort of present
what would normally just be yeah like a
text um output back to you and again it
sounds like rudimentary And it is in
some ways right now, but you think about
like they made this in one minute based
off of a random query that I do. Just
think about like what they'll be able to
do a year from now. And if and if you do
like a thinking version of this where
you give them a few minutes to come up
with like sort of an interactive model
like the outputs I think will be
absolutely incredible. And when you
think about like kids learning this way
like I did one for um like explaining
stock buybacks and it's just like this
great interactive way to to learn. Um,
and so as long as you can trust that
it's not going to hallucinate uh, and
actually give you good um, you know,
good information, I think that this is
just like an incredible bit of product
uh, work that that Google has done here.
And that's why I wrote about it. It felt
like it was being underplayed for for
whatever reason. In part because it has
such a bad name and in part because it's
in labs or whatnot. But um, but again,
that's to your exact point like it feels
like Google has finally woken up also on
the product side to be able to do
interesting things to compat uh, what
OpenAI has historically done. Yeah, I
was just on their labs uh page right now
and it's just filled with interesting
things. So, um all right, before we we
have just a couple minutes left before
we go, I I think you charted out one
more interesting uh thing that's worth
noting before we leave and that is that
uh Anthropic and OpenAI have like really
uh divergent paths right now. Uh if you
like look at their projections,
Anthropic is planning to be profitable
by 2028, which I know sounds like a long
way away. Uh but in AI years is pretty
damn good, where OpenAI is planning to
lose more than hundred billion dollars
between now and 2030 and the losses will
just basically keep ramping as we get
closer. So what do you think this says
about the competition between the two?
And is anthropic just being smart and
saying we're probably going to have some
AI downturn and we're going to try our
best to sort of batt down the houses
hatches and get through it.
>> Uh I do think that that's a part of it.
I think that um it was it's sort of
interesting timing in everything else
that we're talking about, right? like if
it does feel like um you know that the
models are sort of coalesing but also
that there's this this sort of negative
um w uh you know backdrop going on
around uh just investing in AI in
general from the public market sentiment
on down. It feels like yeah if if
Anthropic can sort of take advantage of
like look we're at the cutting edge
right now but we're not going to be the
the sort of drunken sailor spend that
OpenAI is trying to do. So come on board
and and bet with us. And and you know
the most recent report has their new
valuation at 350 billion. So they're
getting pretty close to where OpenAI is
at at 500 billion. It feels like you
know they're they're sort of coming in
um you know in line with those uh with
those numbers which is super interesting
and again maybe speaks to the the
dichotomy between the two um the two
paths that they're taking there. It's
funny, I wrote that post and then that
literally the day later I wrote like,
you know, a number of things in that
post, but one aside was like, and look,
they're not spending all this money on
building their own data centers. And
literally like 12 hours later, they
announced that their first data center
that they're going to build, of course.
Um, but as long as it's one, as long as
it's not, you know, the Stargate pro
project and they're not spending again
hundreds of billions of dollars on
building out their own data centers, you
could certainly argue that they should
probably have some level of their own uh
infrastructure in place so they're not
beholden um to uh to, you know, their
partners on that stuff. And especially
given all the weird as we talked about
all the weird um inner uh investing
going on where it's like yeah uh and
Amazon is is their main partner maybe
but they're also now buying TPUs from
Google and then uh you know but Google's
also you know potentially partnering
with uh you know X Y and Z and then
OpenAI is potentially partnering with
Amazon now too and so there's like I
think anthropic probably has to look at
this as like I'm not sure that we can
rely on you know just just Amazon and
I'm not sure we
rely on just Google. And so, in some
ways, they have to sort of hedge that
long-term bet. I just think like they
might be and might smartly be looking at
the market as it is right now and saying
like the music is starting to slow a
little bit. Let's not commit to spending
hundreds of billions of dollars. Let's
commit to spending mere tens of billions
of dollars for our future and let's see
how the how this shakes out over the
next couple of years. On one hand, it's
interesting because I think people
within anthropic believe that like if
you just scale up your training runs,
then you can get to AGI. Uh on the other
hand, maybe this is some rationality
finally coming into the AI research lab
business where they're maybe smartly
saying, okay, hey, let's let's try to
make some money and and maybe that will
be a good way to ensure that we'll reach
our goal in the long term.
>> Yeah. And the only other thing I would
add is just like it sort of has
naturally played out the way that
Anthropic has done a great job on the
enterprise front, right? Whereas uh
OpenAI has done a great job on the
consumer front. And so we have that sort
of again there's there's nuance there.
And obviously OpenAI is also trying on
the coding front and in enterprise and
whatnot, but but at a high level like
they've sort of splintered off into
those two worlds. And so, uh, you know,
the one is is going to be an easier path
potentially to making money, but we we
seem to be on the cusp of, uh, of OpenAI
potentially rolling out, uh, their first
ads, uh, if some of the leaked internal
builds are are to be believed. And that
will be a whole interesting uh, element
to this to the next year, right, of how
how that plays out,
>> right? So, some of that did show up in I
think the Android code, some places for
advertising. So, uh, that's clearly
coming, uh, probably some at some point
next year. Speaking of next year, that's
going to be the next time, uh, you and I
talk. So, I think we'll kick off January
maybe with some predictions or some
recap of some crazy stuff that happens
in December. But, uh, MG, just want to
say it's been great having you on the
show here. I think we started in the
second half of
>> 2025 and it's been a great addition to
the show. So, looking forward to doing
more together.
>> Thanks so much, Alex. Uh, and happy new
year. And happy new year to all your
listeners. And yeah, we'll catch up in
early Jan.
>> All right, we'll pick it up in January.
All right, everybody. Uh thank you to
MG. Thank you to all of you for
listening and watching. Uh we'll be back
on Wednesday with a couple of anthropic
researchers who found uh a very
interesting pattern in AI models and uh
how they've sort of turned evil uh and
and how you might be able to stop them
from going to the dark side. So that's
coming up on Wednesday and then Raj and
I will be back on Friday to break down
the week's news. Thank you again and
we'll see you next time on Big
Technology Podcast.