If the company achieves a 4-5X growth (15% per year) and 30% margins (instead of 55%) that would place the share price at $176 - 1/4th of what it is today.
If the company achieves a 4-5X growth (15% per year) and 30% margins (instead of 55%) that would place the share price at $176 - 1/4th of what it is today.
Let's look at the addressable market:
The sum of wages in the USA alone is about $100T per year. How much is it worldwide? Let's say $400T.
That is the current TAM when we expect computers to replace humans like cars replaced horses.
Capturing only 1% of that TAM would mean $4T in yearly revenues.
Nvidia's $2T market cap seems tame in face of the size of the opportunity.
But there is another point: A new technology not just replaces an old technology. It 10xes the usage. There are way more cars on the road now than there were horses back then.
The size of the market will grow beyond those $400T. We will build way more stuff when robots carry out all the work. Most of planet earth is unused at the moment. That will change.
But at the end of the day values of money are made up bullshit that attempt to assign a number to scarcity. If we make a world where computers can cheaply (energy/material wise) make all the items humanity needs, that future world is one that is a lot better off then the one we currently exist in. At least if we consider human needs being met valuable.
If science fiction tropes have any connection to reality, us humans may sit around all day in hedonistic gay space communism playing games while robotic/AI systems produce and trade needed resources and energy between each other producing 'value' while humanity itself is just a value sink.
Nvidia is a key player in this. So I would be surprised if they capture less than 1% of that value.
For example, in 1999 I bought food & other goods by delivery to my office and worked with companies selling online, using my handheld computer with a fast wireless connection. Clearly those were ultimately successful ideas, but that didn’t mean that investors in Kozmo, Pets.com, Ricochet, or Handspring got rich.
correct, it needs used for what its true purpose is: paper clip feedstock.
But seriously, what does that comment event mean. The earth isn’t being used? More use would invariably be mean more dystopian, despoiled and privatized, why is that good?
Mind you my personal perspective orients towards the opinion that tech companies do lead the markets more than others through metrics I can't personally rationalise but it's something we all seem to agree with (and I'm ok with if my superannuation/401k is always growing)