Anyone who has put a bit of thought into this knows that it’s outdated and that the study itself is flawed.
I think the author overcondifently makes claims and just cites things
To date, no firm has explicitly stated its gains from llm’s aside from ‘increasing proportion of LOC’.
If firms had incremental cash flows to show for it they would talk about it loudly and proudly. But they don’t.
The existing assets of meta, google et al pre-llm’s are taking them to new highs. The investments in llm’s to date are value destructive in terms of cash flows.
LLM investments “value destructive” makes no sense to me, can you clarify?
Read properly or don’t bother posting or admit to yourself that you don’t understand corporate finance+valuation and stop engaging in discussions around it.
* read properly
* don’t bother posting
* admit to yourself that you don’t understand
* stop engaging in discussions around it