From Spyglass, December 25:
NVIDIA gets a creator of the TPU, access to inference tech & IP, and stops anyone else from getting such things. All for a mere $20B...
Twas the night before Christmas and all through the house, not a creature was stirring, not even a... wait. What's that? Is that Jensen Huang scurrying around doing deals over the holidays?!
It sure is!
Well, presumably he had been working on the deal with the specialized AI chip startup Groq before the holidays started. But I also wouldn't rule out that this deal came together in a hurry given what we know about how he's operated in the past with some mega deals, such as the um, (up to) $100B investment in OpenAI. A deal which came together quickly, perhaps on a trip with a certain President, and perhaps right after the rumors of OpenAI potentially looking at a deal with Google to use their TPUs – we'll come back to that. It was also a deal which was announced three months ago but apparently still has not been finalized, by the way, so there's that.
Anyway, you can't help but wonder if the real key for the timing here may have been to bury it under the spirit of Christmas. Because boy is it a doozy.
CNBC first broke the news with the headline: "Nvidia buying AI chip startup Groq for about $20 billion in its largest acquisition on record". But as it turns out, that wasn't quite right. And actually, it was NVIDIA that wanted to make that clear. They weren't buying Groq, they were merely paying Groq that $20B for a "non-exclusive licensing agreement".
Oh, you've heard that terminology before? Of course you have. It's the magical incantation one must cite in order to summon the spirits of the "hackquisition".
With this deal, NVIDIA is following their Big Tech brethren down this now well-trodden path. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, and NVIDIA have done deals which aren't technically acquisitions, but effectively are. Because they allow the acquiring – sorry, non-acquiring – company to sort of pick and choose what they want from the acquired – sorry, non-acquired – company in exchange for considerations that can go to... well, sort of anyone they choose. Certainly the investors to get them to sign off on such deals, and often the key employees at those companies. Sometimes the other employees of the companies too, but that's mainly so they don't feel bad and/or raise a stink about the faux-deal. Because when they do that, all hell tends to break loose, at least from a PR-perspective.
Anyway, the first wave of "hackquisitions" were almost more like "hackquihires" because they were simply a way to get access to key talent at those companies and any licensing agreements were seemingly an excuse to make it all a little less blatant. But as such deals have grown in size, they've grown to look even more like actual acquisitions. For example, Meta's nearly-$15B deal with Scale.ai bought them 49% of that company alongside their key talent, namely CEO Alexandr Wang. Why? Presumably Meta wanted more for that amount of money and they thought Scale, a hot company at the time, might still give them some upside. Of course, they were also effectively gutting said company and it seems decidedly less hot now – especially since many of their customers were Meta competitors who no longer wanted to send their data to Scale – shocking, I know. Still, Meta also likely believed they could use Scale's service to help with their future model training – efforts which were rebooting alongside bringing Wang on board.
NVIDIA's Groq deal seemingly has similarities. Namely, the key was clearly to bring CEO Jonathan Ross on board. And every story also points to company president Sunny Madra being crucial as well. But beyond that, it sounds like NVIDIA may actually care about some of the IP rights here (which they're presumably getting a license to with their "non-exclusive licensing agreement"), to be able to leverage Groq's techniques in would-be future chips.
In that way, "non-exclusive" feels less important here – that's another framing to make it seem less like an acquisition, but is anyone else really getting access to this IP now? Regardless, NVIDIA probably feels confident that with Ross and Madra – not to mention their own in-house prowess – they'll be able to implement it and execute upon it far better than anyone else. And they're undoubtedly not wrong.
And that points to another layer to this as well. Ross is not just a co-founder of Groq, he's also the creator of the TPU – something which he cites in his own bio. You may recall the TPU was last a part of a major news cycle when Jensen Huang was "delighted" about Google's success with their AI chips. How do I know that NVIDIA is actually not so "delighted" about Google's success here and is in fact sweating the rise of the TPU? Well, this deal, for one!....
....MUCH MORE
Recently:- "Nvidia Licenses Groq's AI Chip Tech, Grabs Top Execs In Not-Quite Takeover" (NVDA)
- "Nvidia's Groq deal underscores how the AI chip giant uses its massive balance sheet to 'maintain dominance'" (NVDA)
And on the TPU:
November 25 - CHIPS: Google's Tensor Processing Unit (Finally) A Viable Competitor For Nvidia (GOOG; NVDA)
....While we've been tracking the GOOG's TPU progress for a decade, this morning Zerohedge found a dandy little write-up on the chips that we'll go with rather than use back-links....
