I find this conversation foreign - along with the argument that we are "data center constrained" or "energy constrained." Historically, in markets - price is the leveler of supply and demand. If you have a constraint, you price higher - you don't have "surplus demand." But in this market, VC$$$ act as subsidies (as they did in consumer internet). Everyone believes if they have high growth they get unlimited VC$$$. The biggest fear becomes losing market share. So "growth at all costs" becomes the game on the field. With that reality, you are always going to have some constraint, because you are "knowingly" choosing pricing that is out of whack with balancing supply/demand. It will continue until the major players feel they are forced to reconcile unit economics and profitability (as eventually happened in ride sharing when Lyft went public). Until then, you by definition have constraints. We can’t disentangle true demand from subsidized demand yet. Some of the incremental demand is being engineered by the excessive VC$$$ forced into the system, and the competitive dynamic between two companies that are losing massive amounts of money. No one can argue they aren't losing tons of money. Amazon and Uber maxed out around $2B a year. These companies could lose $10B on more in 2026.
Working on something ambitious is like climbing a mountain that’s covered in fog.
You can't see a clear path to the top. You have to take a few steps into the unknown to be able to see the next few steps in front of you. Inevitably, sometimes you’ll end up a local maximum and have to backtrack. That’s fine, just keep moving.
@money_cruncher Great strategy but this is misleading and for the majority of folks will be fraud. The IRS will come for them and you will be no where to be found