China Is Going Nuts: Adding Massive Amounts Of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation

From the Associated Press, February 3:

Why China is building so many coal plants despite its solar and wind boom

Even as China’s expansion of solar and wind power raced ahead in 2025, the Asian giant opened many more coal power plants than it had in recent years — raising concern about whether the world’s largest emitter will reduce carbon emissions enough to limit climate change.

More than 50 large coal units — individual boiler and turbine sets with generating capacity of 1 gigawatt or more — were commissioned in 2025, up from fewer than 20 a year over the previous decade, a research report released Tuesday said. Depending on energy use, 1 gigawatt can power from several hundred thousand to more than 2 million homes.

Overall, China brought 78 gigawatts of new coal power capacity online, a sharp uptick from previous years, according to the joint report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, which studies air pollution and its impacts, and Global Energy Monitor, which develops databases tracking energy trends.

“The scale of the buildout is staggering,” said report co-author Christine Shearer of Global Energy Monitor. “In 2025 alone, China commissioned more coal power capacity than India did over the entire past decade.” ....

....MUCH MORE 

Here's the report the AP is drawing on for the statistics:

Built to peak: Coal power expansion runs out of room in China
February 2026 

About CREA
The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) is an independent research organisation focused on revealing the trends, causes, and health impacts, as well as the solutions to air pollution. CREA uses scientific data, research, and evidence to support the efforts of governments, companies, and campaigning organisations worldwide in their efforts to move towards clean energy and clean air, believing that effective research and communication are the keys to successful policies, investment decisions, and advocacy efforts. CREA was founded in Helsinki and has staff in several Asian and European countries.....

*****

....MUCH MORE

Most recently on China and coal: 

September 17, 2025 -  "China’s Coal Power Can Win The AI Race"
The price of electricity is a big factor in determining who can go farthest, fastest. 
Which sort of sucks. 

September 21, 2025 -  "China Accelerates Coal Plant Commissioning To 9-Year High"

August 2023 - "China Has Approved More Than 50 Gigawatts Of New Coal Power"

....Every year there's a new excuse.
As we said in June 2021's "Who Is Helping Finance China's Coal Infrastructure Build-Out?":

If you guessed HSBC you may already be a winner.
Or you may be a coal financier with knowledge of the business.
China has no intention of stopping their own coal development or that of their client states in Asia and Africa.* They make lovely, soothing speeches about climate and stuff and build $30 billion dedicated coal hauling railways....

When you see infrastructure like this being built you know the nice words from the Chinese are aimed at the stupid and credulous:

March 2021 -  China Does Not Plan To Stop Burning Coal 

Run-through rail car dumpers at the Port of Huanghua in Hebei. pic.twitter.com/BD5Th5s2eu

— MachinePix (@MachinePix) February 9, 2021

Stunning aerial view of China's longest coal transport route, a heavy-loaded #railway scheduled to be completed later this year pic.twitter.com/KHd9DyUohw

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) July 20, 2019

Some more from the Covid-time:

"Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined" 

"China has ‘no other choice’ but to rely on coal power for now, official says"

China's Electricity Derived From Thermal (coal, oil, etc) Up 21.1% Q1 2021 vs. Q1 2020

One of our sources said the growth in thermal plant capacity* (not production) in 2020 was 38.4 gigawatts. This is the equivalent of adding a large (1,000 megawatt) coal plant every nine days. Every nine days.
Continuing that trend, coal plant capacity additions just in the first quarter of 2021 were 10,600 megawatts....

See also March 18's "China Energy Stats and Policy" 

"China's new coal power plant capacity in 2020 more than three times rest of world's"

"China generated 53% of the world’s total coal-fired power in 2020"

 Let's Get This Straight: China Has No Intention Of Giving Up Coal

Something we've been saying for so long I start to bore myself.

It's time to name (can't shame, they have no shame) the enablers of the massive long con China is running.

From the financiers backing Chinese coal to the lobbyists to the useful idiots to the UNocrats and the International Emissions Trading Association, to China's handmaidens in the American media, they are nothing but a bunch of liars and thieves enablers, apologists and grifters. Supergrifters. The time is long past when they deserve any attention at all and frankly, if I had my druthers, they would be dealt with the way the IRA dealt with Supergrasses. Not that we have any love for the IRA.

 China Does Not Plan To Stop Burning Coal

"Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined"

Follow-up: Just How Much Coal Fired Power Is China Currently Planning/Building?"

"China Raises Coal and Gas Output to Records After Prices Surge"
Have I mentioned that China has been lying about their climate goals and decarbonization efforts for 25 years?

*****

Uh huh. 

It wouldn't be worth commenting on except for the fact China burns quite a bit of coal.

• China Never Had Any Intention Of Quitting Coal
• "IEA urges India and China to put climate pledges into action as coal power generation reaches record levels"
• China Is Now Backtracking On All Those Nice Global Warming Promises They Made At COP26
• 'Global Warming": "Useful idiots' who let China off the hook: Why is there such an apparent lack of concern over their determination to keep burning coal"

....China is not just the largest burner of coal but it burns more coal than the rest of the world combined, and they have burned more coal than the rest of the world combined since at least 2014 and probably longer.....

And many, many more. Just call us your little ray of institutional memory sunshine on this stuff. 

https://climateerinvest.blogspot.com/search?q=china+coal&max-results=20&by-date=true

"Russian Woman Who Drunk-Texted FBI Agent Pleads to Spying for FSB" (now with more Epstein)

Two posts from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

First up, February 20:

Nomma Zarubina heading U.S. prison for spying for Russian intelligence after a few tumultuous months in which her bail was revoked for harassing an investigator on her case. 

A Russian woman charged with lying about her intelligence ties agreed to a plea deal in a New York federal courtroom Thursday, capping a tumultuous few months that saw her jailed for drunk texting an FBI agent.

Nomma Zarubina, 35, was arrested in November 2024 on charges that she lied to the FBI about her meeting with agents of the FSB, Russia’s principal intelligence agency. Prosecutors in April 2025 added charges alleging she engaged in interstate transport of women for prostitution.

She pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI and to one count of naturalization fraud for lying on her naturalization application about involvement in prostitution.

“Zarubina’s intentional concealment of her misconduct and her lies about her affiliation with Russian intelligence were an affront to law enforcement’s national security efforts,” James Barnacle Jr., Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s New York Field Office, said in a statement. 

Denied bail, she faces up to five years in prison on each count, and is scheduled to receive her sentence June 11. In exchange for her plea, prosecutors dropped the prostitution-related charges, a Southern District of New York spokesperson told OCCRP.

The deal came after U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain on January 30 granted the American government’s request to keep much of the case secret on grounds of national security under the Classified Information Procedures Act.

Zarubina’s indictment alleged that she was recruited by the FSB in her native city of Tomsk to develop contacts at American think tanks in a bid to induce more pro-Russia views. She was given the code name Alyssa, the indictment said.

Zarubina’s social media accounts showed her across the U.S. at international relations conferences, and her LinkedIn page listed her as also working for a UN-affiliated non-profit called Sail of Hope. 

Zarubina came to the attention of the FBI when agents were investigating her employer, Elena Branson, who ran the Russian Center in New York. 

Branson fled shortly before a federal indictment in March 2022 alleging she was an unregistered foreign agent for Russia who spread propaganda and facilitated Russian government objectives. Branson’s case remains open because she has not returned to face trial. 

As Zarubina awaited trial, she began texting with an investigating FBI agent, alternately sending sexually suggestive messages and threatening texts. When her texting persisted despite judge warnings and an order to get counseling for alcohol abuse, she was ordered into detention ahead of her trial, which was scheduled for June this year.

Some of her texts also indicated she saw similarities between her case and another Russian woman sent to influence prominent Americans, Maria Butina.

Screenshots of Zarubina texts entered as evidence by prosecutors showed her complaining to the FBI agent that her case was getting less attention than Butina’s....

....MORE 

And a different woman, different think tank story, February 11:

Jeffrey Epstein Arranged Employment for Romantic Partner at Top U.S. Think Tank  

Emails show Epstein helped a girlfriend obtain roles at the International Peace Institute, a New York-based think tank, and may even have subsidized her salary at one point.  

Jeffrey Epstein appears to have pulled strings to secure employment at a prominent New York City think tank for a Russian woman he had an intimate relationship with, newly released documents show.

Emails show Epstein making inquiries about the woman’s career with people connected to the International Peace Institute (IPI), including its former president, Norwegian ex-diplomat Terje Rød-Larsen. They also suggest that he subsidized her salary at one point.

The IPI is a nonprofit that produces policy research and convenes events focused on international cooperation, particularly within the United Nations system.

Rød-Larsen resigned from the think tank in 2020 over other dealings with Epstein, which included accepting a personal loan from him, as well as allowing him to make multiple donations to IPI. 

“The notion that IPI would be in any way engaged with such an odious character is repugnant to the institution’s core values,” the IPI board said in a statement at the time, emphasizing that it had been unaware of Epstein’s donations and would engage an auditor to identify them and donate an equivalent sum to charity.

“Although many institutions have decided to keep some or all of these donations, the IPI Board takes the strict view that every dollar should be re-donated,” the statement said.

It is unclear whether the board was aware that Epstein was involved in discussions about the woman’s work at the organization, and appears to have subsidized at least some of her earnings there. IPI did not respond to a request for comment. A lawyer representing Rød-Larsen, John Christian Elden, said that he had never been involved in employment matters at IPI — which he led from 2005 to 2020 — and would not have been involved in the woman’s hiring.

The woman started working for IPI as an intern in 2016. In a series of emails in early 2018, she repeatedly asked Epstein to talk to Rød-Larsen about the possibility of securing a job. 

“[L]et me know when y=u talk to Terje,” she asked in one. “So I am in the loop of what’s going on and how I should approach my conversation with people who does all the process with …employment.” Two weeks later, the woman followed up: “Wanted to check if you talked to Terje … as human resources department asked me to come up=to their floor to sign the contract today 😟.” 

Emails show she did get a full-time job at the think tank, and IPI’s 2018 annual report lists her as an external relations assistant. (OCCRP has decided not to name women associated with Epstein in the absence of clear evidence of wrongdoing or illegality on their part.)

Her career also came up in text messages between Epstein and former Slovak Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajčák, a friend of Rød-Larsen’s and a regular speaker at IPI events. (Lajčák stepped down from his position as an adviser to Slovakia’s president after the release of a huge tranche of emails on January 30 by the U.S. Justice Department revealed that he had exchanged frequent messages with Epstein about young women. Lajčák did not respond to a request for comment.) 

“[She] is a woman that works for Terje [Rød-Larsen] at iPi,” Epstein wrote to Lajčák in March 2018. She is educated ( the new school )and works on water issues . Is there a way to get her involved in the water project. I will subsidize if needed.”

The Slovak minister quickly agreed: “I will arrange.”

Epstein forwarded this message to the woman, who replied: “Many many thanks! I will do and kiss whatever you want me to.”

The following month, she wrote to Epstein: “[M]y first piece on water published! :)”. The same day, an article on water diplomacy with her byline was posted on IPI’s Global Observatory blog.

Cash and Connections
Emails and messages between Epstein and the woman in the files make it clear that they had a longstanding personal relationship that involved frequent visits to his house, during which she would give him massages.

She routinely asked for money for rent, bills, food, hair and beauty treatments, and clothes. The emails also show that Epstein paid for some of her schooling, gave her a credit card to use, and sent $10,000 to her father in Siberia. He even helped her choose a new suit to wear at IPI....

....MUCH MORE 

I may have to change my opinion of think tanks and non-profits and NGOs and that whole world. 

"CPUs are Back: The Datacenter CPU Landscape in 2026"

From SemiAnalysis, February 9:

RL and Agent Usage, Context Memory Storage, DRAM Pricing Impacts, CPU Interconnect Evolution, AMD Venice, Verano, Florence, Intel Diamond Rapids, Coral Rapids, Arm Phoenix + Venom, Graviton 5, Axion 

Since 2023, the datacenter story has been simple. GPUs and networking are king. The arrival and subsequent explosion of AI Training and Inference have shifted compute demands away from the CPU. This meant that Intel, the primary supplier of server CPUs, failed to ride the wave of datacenter buildout and spending. Server CPU revenue remained relatively stagnant as hyperscalers and neoclouds focused on GPUs and datacenter infrastructure.

At the same time, the same hyperscalers have been rolling their own ARM-based datacenter CPUs for their cloud computing services, closing off a significant addressable market for Intel. And within their own x86 turf, Intel’s lackluster execution and uncompetitive performance to rival AMD has further eroded market share. Without a competent AI accelerator offering, Intel was left to tread water while the rest of the industry feasted.

Over the last 6 months this has changed massively. We have posted multiple reports to Core Research and the Tokenomics Model about soaring CPU demand. The primary drivers we have shown and modeled are reinforcement learning and vibe coding’s incredible demand on CPUs. We have also covered major CPU cloud deals by multiple vendors with AI labs. We also have modeling of how many CPUs of what types are being deployed.

 

Intel Q4’25 DCAI Revenue. Source: Intel 

However, Intel’s recent rallies and changing demand signals in the latter part of 2025 have shown that CPUs are now relevant again. In their latest Q4 earnings, Intel saw an unexpected uptick in datacenter CPU demand in late 2025 and are increasing 2026 capex guidance on foundry tools and prioritizing wafers to server from PC to alleviate supply constraints in serving this new demand. This marks an inflection point in the role of CPUs in the datacenter, with AI model training and inference using CPUs more intensively.

 

Datacenter CPU Core Count Trend. Source: SemiAnalysis Estimates 

2026 is an exciting year for the datacenter CPU, with many new generations launching this year from all vendors amid the boom in demand. As such, this piece serves to paint the CPU landscape in 2026. We lay the groundwork, covering the history of the datacenter CPU and the evolving demand drivers, with deep dives on datacenter CPU architecture changes from Intel and AMD over the years.

We then focus on the 2026 CPUs, with comprehensive breakdowns on Intel’s Clearwater Forest, Diamond Rapids and AMD’s Venice and their interesting convergence (and divergence) in design, discussing the performance differences and previewing our CPU costing analysis.

Next, we detail the ARM competition, including NVIDIA’s Grace and Vera, Amazon’s Graviton line, Microsoft’s Cobalt, Google’s Axion CPU lines, Ampere Computing’s merchant ARM silicon bid and their acquisition by Softbank, ARM’s own Phoenix CPU design and look at Huawei’s home grown Kunpeng CPU efforts.

For our subscribers, we provide our datacenter CPU roadmap to 2028 and detail the datacenter CPUs beyond 2026 from AMD, Intel, ARM and Qualcomm. We then look ahead to what the future looks like for datacenter CPUs, discuss the effects of the DRAM shortage, what NVIDIA’s Bluefield-4 Context Memory Storage platform means for the future of general purpose CPUs, and the key trends to look out for in the CPU market and CPU designs going forward.

The Role and Evolution of Datacenter CPUs
The PC Era 

The modern version of the datacenter CPU can be traced back to the 1990s following the success of Personal Computers in the prior decade, bringing basic computing into the home. As PC processing power grew with Intel’s i386, i486 and Pentium generations, many tasks normally computed by advanced workstation and mainframe computers from the likes of DEC and IBM were instead done on PCs at a fraction of the cost. Responding to this need for higher performance “mainframe replacements”, Intel began to release PC processor variants that had more performance and larger caches for higher prices, starting with the Pentium Pro in 1995 that had multiple L2 cache dies co-packaged with the CPU in a Multi-Chip Module (MCM). The Xeon brand then followed suit in 1998, with the Pentium II Xeons that similarly had multiple L2 cache dies added to the CPU processor slot. While mainframes still continue today in the IBM Z lines used for bank transaction verifications and such, they remain a niche corner of the market that we will not cover in this piece.

The Dot Com Era
The 2000s brought the internet age, with the emergence of Web 2.0, e-mail, e-commerce, Google search, smartphones with 3G broadband data, and the need for datacenter CPUs to serve the world’s internet traffic as everything went online. Datacenter CPUs grew into a multi-billion dollar segment. On the design front, after the GHz wars were over with the end of Dennard scaling, attention shifted to multi-core CPUs and increased integration. AMD integrated the memory controller into the CPU silicon, and high-speed IO (PCIe) came directly from the CPU as well. Multi-core CPUs were especially suited for datacenter workloads, where many tasks could be run in parallel across different cores.

We will detail the evolution of how these multiple cores are connected in the interconnect section below. Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT) was also introduced in this time by both AMD and Intel, partitioning a core into two logical threads that could operate independently while sharing most core resources, further improving performance in parallelizable datacenter workloads. Those looking for more performance would turn to Multi-socket CPU servers, with Intel’s Quick Path Interconnect (QPI) and AMD’s HyperTransport Direct Connect Architecture in their Opteron CPUs providing coherent links between up to eight sockets per server.

The Virtualization and Cloud Computing Hyperscaler Era
The next major inflection point came with cloud computing in the late 2000s, and was the primary growth driver for datacenter CPU sales throughout the 2010s. Much like how GPU Neoclouds are operating today, computing resources began consolidating toward public cloud providers and hyperscalers such as Amazon’s Web Services (AWS) as customers traded CapEx for OpEx. Spurred by the effects of the Great Recession, many enterprises could not afford to buy and run their own servers to run their software and services.

Cloud computing offered a far more palatable “pay as you use” business model with renting compute instances and running your workloads on 3rd-party hardware, which allowed spending to dynamically adjust with usage that varied over time. This scalability was more favorable than procuring one’s own servers, which needed to be utilized fully at all times to maximize ROI. The Cloud also enabled more streamlined services to emerge, such as serverless computing from the likes of AWS Lambda that automatically allocates software to computing resources, sparing the customer from having to decide on the appropriate number of instances to spin up before running a particular task. With nearly everything handled by them behind the scenes, Clouds turned compute into a commodity....

....MUCH MORE 

However.... 

February 18 - "Why Nvidia’s deal with Meta is an ‘Intel killer,’ according to this analyst" (NVDA; META; ARM; INTC; AVGO)

February 20 - "Nvidia is moving in on Intel and AMD's home turf" (NVDA; INTC; AMD; META) 
The market may not have fully absorbed this news when it crossed the tape a couple days ago.*

"The financialisation of AI is just beginning"

From The Economist, February 17:

Get ready for a new wave of securities, hedges and collateral

This year just five American tech giants are set to make $700bn-worth of capital expenditure, as investment in the data centres needed for artificial intelligence surges. Investors have long quipped that “data is the new oil”; now they are backing firms to spend far more to process it. By comparison, the oil and gas industry invested just $570bn in exploration and production last year.

Yet in another sense, data—or at least the chips on which it is stored and manipulated—still lags far behind oil. Graphics processing units (GPUs) play a tiny role in financial markets. True, some loans use them as collateral, but they remain hard to price and to sell on. There is practically no market for GPU derivatives, which allow traders to parcel up and offload risks (such as that of a price crash). Chips and the processing power they generate (or “compute”) are therefore ripe to be financialised by Wall Street—just like oil, housing and myriad other assets before them. A wave of new innovators hopes to do just that.

Take OneChronos, a fintech firm established in 2016 to make share-trading more efficient. The company aims to launch a market for compute, on which bundles of goods can be auctioned, by June. It has paired up with Auctionomics, co-founded by Paul Milgrom, who won the Nobel prize for economics in 2020. Then there is Ornn, which has launched an index tracking the prices of chips, including Nvidia’s popular H100. The startup also plans to sell put options—derivative contracts that pay out if prices fall sharply—on physical GPUs.

Eventually, the combination of trusted benchmarks and liquid derivatives markets could support bonds collateralised by baskets of GPUs, much like those backed by bundles of individual loans. Few investors possess detailed knowledge of Californian consumers or Ohio’s office market. Many nevertheless snap up bonds collateralised by credit-card debt and commercial mortgages.

To build such a market, some fearsome obstacles must be overcome. Perhaps the biggest one is that the most advanced chips tend to lose their value fast, as even whizzier ones come to market. Morgan Stanley estimates that this could prompt Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta and Oracle to record depreciations worth $680bn over the next four years. Any estimate like this is subject to huge uncertainty, since no one can know for sure how the technology will progress. This represents a big risk to buyers of loans collateralised by GPUs that might unexpectedly tumble in price. Even now, for the biggest buyers of chips, comparing the most recent models to those of a decade ago is like comparing a supersonic jet to a horse and cart.

Then there are the difficulties with trading compute. Users need to be fairly close to their data centres, which, unlike fuel, cannot be shuttled from one place to another. And so prices vary a lot from region to region, since it is not easy for trade flows to match supply to demand.

If such obstacles could be overcome, however, the prize of more sophisticated financial instruments would be a hugely valuable one. Derivative contracts could help allocate risks—that particular types of chip suddenly become worthless, for instance—to traders who actually want to take them, in exchange for a premium. That might allow companies with business models which depend on GPUs to worry less that their assets might rapidly become obsolete and focus more on improving their operations. Conversely, compute-hungry startups would find it easier to borrow if their loans could be collateralised with chips, then bundled together with others and sold as bonds....

....MUCH MORE

The First Bubble: German Silver Mining Shares

For some years I had been intending to post a 20-page monograph entitled:  "The First Bubble. Silvermining in the Saxon Erzgebirge, c. 1470-1540" by Stuart Jenks. So today, when I finally get around to it I discovered that due to either OCR problems or formatting gibberish the copy I have is close to unreadable. See after the jump.

Fortunately Daniel DeMatos, CFA wrote his own version of the story which we'll use as a jumping-off point until I can get tech support to tell me to try turning the PDF server off and on. From Mr. DeMatos' LinkedIn, May 27, 2024:

Mining can be a very capital-intensive business. Prospecting for gold by panning in a river may not be, but digging mine shafts and building any accompanying infrastructure to extract metal from deeper reserves most certainly is. So, to develop a mine, new companies with little history raise money by issuing shares to a large group of investors, many of them small investors interested in speculative investments. From the 15th century, Germany saw issuance and trading in mining shares that funded the creation of new silver mines, primarily in Saxony and the Harz mountain regions. These shares were very speculative investments.

Silver

            In early modern Europe, silver and gold from the Americas expanded the money supply but there was also growth in the production of precious metals in Europe. A few regions of Germany became important centers for silver mining. One of these was the Erzgebirge, or ‘Ore Mountains’, in Saxony. Silver mining here began with a discovery of silver ore in Freiberg in 1168. The Erzgebirge would have one hundred and forty working mines in the mid-18th century.

             Another key mining region was the area of the Harz mountains in central Germany. This became the most important silver mining region of Germany starting from the end of the Thirty Years War in 1648. In 1670, there was a large increase in the number of mines in the Harz region. The boom in new mining operations continued through 1740 here.

             However, mining was a particularly uncertain venture because the metal was found in individual pockets of varying size. Therefore, the location and amount of the metal was not easy to determine even considering information that can be gleamed from other finds nearby. Water seepage also required constant attention and a combination of labor and infrastructure to address; together these factors meant mining required steady investments of capital.

Shares

            With the permission of the territory’s prince, a mining company could be formed. Ownership in mining companies would be divided into 128 shares and these could in turn be further divided into fractional shares. These shares would be issued to raise money to develop the mine and fund losses until it was profitable, if it ever got profitable. To raise money despite the odds, some mining companies were given reassuring names. Examples included 15th century mines called 'Hope' (Hoffnung), 'Certainty' (Gewißheit), 'Rich Mine' (Reiche Zeche), and 'Rich Treasure' (Reicher Schatz).

            Shares in mining companies were called Kuxe. They could be divided, mortgaged, and sold freely. Shareholders received a share of any profits but, this being a time before widespread limited liability was common for companies, they were also personally responsible to cover the company’s losses periodically. However, it seems it was common for shareholders to be less-than-forthcoming with the money to cover losses. If an investor could not make the payment, the share was supposed to revert to the other investors in the firm who could take it on themselves or sell it to a new investor. It was probably the case that unable or unwilling investors tried to sell their shares themselves first.

            Shareholders were passive investors as management would be left in the hands of others. These were not only private managers. A state mining official representing the prince of that territory held substantial power over mines. Among carrying out other responsibilities, it was these officials who would organize the companies, giving one Kuxe to the landowner on whose land the minerals were found. Indeed, under Saxon law at least, landowners were not given full mineral rights over land they owned. Mining companies could open mines on other’s land without seeking permission from anyone other than the prince.

            On behalf of the prince, state officials supervised the mines. Though the investors would elect a committee of between two to four people who would appoint a manager, these managers would need to be approved by the state. The investors would also pick a local representative, who lived in the vicinity of the mine, to manage requests for capital from investors and distributions of any profits. Of any profits, the officials would ensure that the state would take one-tenth of the production of Saxon mines for itself. The state also had the option to buy the silver produced at a price below market value.

Trading

            Kuxe could be freely traded without requiring the consent of other investors in the same company. The exchange of shares with a sale contract would be followed by an update to the register listing the owners. Annual turnover in shares could be high. Shares in mines would trade at the trade fairs of Leipzig, held a few times each year. At the Leipzig trade fairs, trading in mining shares began in 1472. At this fair, distributions to investors were also made, so they were critical to the sort of financial structure devised for the mines. Besides Leipzig, shares also traded in Frankfurt.

            At these fairs, stockbrokers specializing in Kuxe were called Kuxkrenzler. Some also traded for their own account and insider trading and market manipulation were common. They were known for spreading misleading information about mines. Kuxkrenzler would show prospective investors ore samples from locations different than the mines being considered for investment. Discerning buyers protected themselves with clauses that required sellers to make good on capital calls to cover loses on the buyer’s behalf for a period of time after the trade. Also, some contracts allowed the buyer to back out of the trade after the fact, subject to paying a modest fee.

Investors

            Perhaps because of a secondary market for the Kuxe, investors were quite a diverse set. Records show that they included people active in the metals trade but also journeymen, clergy, nobility, and university faculty. Institutions like the town councils of Leipzig, Zwickau, and Chemnitz as well as artisan guilds also invested in mines. Some stayed away, like Martin Luther who in 1544 said ‘'I don't want to have anything to do with mining shares! They are play money, and play money does not increase in value”....

....MUCH MORE 

Here is a bit of the Stuart Jenks piece. As you can see it's a mess. 

There were two university-hosted versions of the 20 page paper but they have not only disappeared but are un-Googleable and unavailable at the Internet Archive.

Additionally Academia.edu hosts a version but I would counsel against giving them your information, they are at minimum very spammy and who knows what else.

Right off the bat Jenks attacks Prof. Shiller's contention that you need mass media to spread the bubble and he might be right, though coincidentally the printing press was invented 30 years before the start of Jenks' period under review.

If the Jenks paper gives you a headache, here's story about a guy who ended up with a lot of Kuxe and a lot of metal, enough to make him the richest person in Europe and one of the richest ever in world history: Goldenballs: Not For Nothing Was Jacob Fugger Known as “Jacob the Rich”

Jenks:  

The First Bubble. Silvermining in the Saxon Erzgebirge, c. 1470-1540

Abstract Since the trade in shares (Kuxe) in Saxon silver mines in Schneeberg, Annaberg and Marienberg from c. I47O onwards shows essentialcharacteristics of a speculative bubble, it can be designated as the first bubble whose existence can be demonstrated from the sources.The paper sketchesthe relevant structuresof the Saxon mining industry at the cusp of the 15th century, sets out the criteria the literature regardsas being crucial for demonstrating the existence of a speculative bubble and judges how well the tradein shares in Saxonsilver mines fits the definition.

The history of speculative bubblesbeginsroughly with the advent of newspapers ... Although the news media ... present themselves as detached obseffers of market events, they are themselvesan integral part of those events" (Shiller (2005)85) 

  It is my contention that Shiller is wrong. Speculative bubblesoccurred long beforethe advent of newspapers or published financial reporting, whose roots reach no farther back thanthe late 17th century (Neal (1988)). Since the tradein shares (Kuxe)in Saxon silver mines in Schneeberg, Axnaberg and Marienberg from c. 7470 onwardsshows essential characteristics of a speculative bubble,it can be designated as the first bubble whoseexistence can be demonstrated from the sources. In order to prove that this is so, I will first sketch the relevantstructures of the Saxonmining industry at the cusp of the 15th century, then set out the criteria the literature regards as being crucial for demonstrating the existence of a speculative bubble' and (3) determinehow well the tradein shares in Saxonsilver mines fits the dehnition of a bubble' THeSnxoNMtNtNcINpusrnY  

The historyof silver mining in Saxony begins with the discovery of enormous deposits of silver ore in Freiberg in 1168 (Schirmer(2000) 7-8 with references to the older literature). Huge amounts of silverwere extracted in the late l2tl' and 13th centuries,but by the 1390s the boom was over. However, Freiberg generated the legal framework for silver mining in Schneeberg, Annaberg-Buchholz and Marienberg,where massive silver depositswere discovered in 1470, 1492 and l5I9 respectively (Laube (1974) 22-37). Over the next 80 years the.amount of silver produced(Graph i) constituted - togetherwith the production of yet more silver by meansof thesaigerprocess(Graph 2)-the centralcauseof thePriceRevolutionatthe beginning of the early modern era (Munro (2003)). 

 I I might as well state at the outset that I am not convinced by the Efficient Markets Hypothesis.

SrRucrunn oF THE SaxoN MINING INDUSTRy The structure of the Saxonmining industry was determined by two peculiarities. The first of these was geological.The geology of the Erzgebirge is extremely complex. As the result of volcanic eruptions and the cooling processes of magma, silver ore was found in individual pockets of varying size located in the cracks and pores of the bedrock (Laube (1914),21-2with references to the geological literature). Hence, no one could foresee where silver deposits might be found or estimate how large they might be once they had been found. Finding and extracting the ore thus dependedupon a continuous stream of working capital.Worse yet, once the surfacedeposits (down to a depth of 50 meters) had been exhausted, water seepage became a serious problem. There were two solutions to this problem: the ground water was either lifted out in leather buckets attached to a paternosterchain driven by animal or water power (Ludwig, Schmidtchen (1997) 70-5,219-24), or it was drained out by driving a tunnel into the mountain underneaththe deepestpit. Both solutions, of course, required technical expertise and significantamounts of capital. The solution the Saxon mining industry found to the problem of providing a continuous stream of working capital was one of the most wide-reaching financial innovations in European history. In dividing the ownershipof eachpit (which was an SruanrJsNrs independent corporation) into a numberof shares, calledKuxe'- at first, therewere four per pit, but the number quickly roseto 32 andfinally 128 and fractions thereofas capital requirementsexploded - the Saxon mining industry invented the public lending corporation.The owner of a Kux was entitled to Ill2Sth of all profits of the pit ('Ausbeute'),but was also liable for Ill2Sth of all running costs.s Since it was impossible to say in advance what costsmight be incurred, Kuxe had no par value, but they could be bought and sold on the openmarketwithout inforrning the other investors or obtaining their approval (Dietrich(1958)170). Moreover, since there was no limit on the number of pits whose Kuxe one could buy, an investor could spreadhis risks amongst a number of mines and continuously reconstitute his portfolio, dependent upon his own risk assessment and degree of risk aversion (Westermann (1997) 58). This capital structure had two important advantages for the Saxon mining industry as a whole. On the one hand, it provided a continuous stream of working capital for individual pits, as insolvent investors were replaced by those who could meetcalls.On the other,it allowed investors to spread their risks and optimize their portfolios. This is not to say that every investorgot rich quick. In fact, most lost money,sincethe success of their investments depended upon the sheergood luck of discovering(large) deposits of silver ore. Most mines just chewed up working capital without producing any profits. The Nuremberghumanist Sebaldus Schreyer, for instance, invested 272 fl. in 15 shares in 11 pits rn 1477,but had to meet calls for 85 to 95 fl. during the next eleven years, after which he sold all of his....

India As Beneficiary Of New World (Trade) Order

From Barron's February 18 (pre-Supreme Court ruling):

India Is the Big Winner in Trump’s Trade War 

About the author: Brian P. Klein is the founder of RidgePoint Global, a strategic advisory firm, and a former U.S. diplomat.

India may be one of the greatest benefactors of the new global trading order. With President Donald Trump focused on his on-again, off-again tariffs and China fixated on exporting its manufacturing excesses, New Delhi is increasingly at the center of shifting trade routes and reconfigured value chains. Its economy could soon be growing at a pace unseen since China’s rapid rise in the 1980s.

India is already the world’s fifth largest economy and is likely to overtake Germany and Japan to become a top-three economy by 2030. The recently signed free-trade agreement between the European Union and India, which eliminated most tariffs across nearly all trade categories, will turbocharge that growth.

When it takes effect in 2027, the free-trade agreement will be the world’s largest, covering a quarter of the population (more than the U.S. and China combined) and roughly 25% of global gross domestic product. Washington’s tariff threats added the pressure that both India and Europe needed to finally reach consensus in January after two decades of trade negotiations. The two regions’ futures are increasingly tied to each other rather than to the U.S.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi knows it pays to keep the U.S. nominally open to Indian goods while building a massive free trade zone elsewhere. Under pressure to stop buying oil from Russia, India negotiated with the U.S. over tariffs earlier this month. The resulting U.S.-India Joint Statement is full of intentions and promises—the U.S. will reduce tariffs on India from a threatened 50% to 18%—but the agreement pales in comparison to the zero tariff rate on Indian goods entering the EU.

Manufacturing activity is already beginning to shift to India. BMW is accelerating its electric vehicle production in India for the domestic market. Ericsson, a Swedish telecom company, announced a new research and development hub in Bengaluru last year. South Korean conglomerate HD Hyundai plans to dramatically increase India’s domestic ship building capacity with a port expansion and greenfield port development in the southern state of Tamil Nadu, India’s hub for export-oriented automotive industries. The Indian government has also launched a major manufacturing effort, called Semicon 1, to attract investment in semiconductor production. So far, $18 billion has been invested in 10 projects.

Plenty of bumps remain along the trading roads that inexorably lead to India....

....MUCH MORE 

Also at Barron's, February 19: 

India Scored a Successful Trade Deal With the U.S. Investors Aren’t Impressed. 

That's fine, impressing portfolio investors is not the goal. Impressing foreign direct investors and clearing the runway for a ten-year run to technological superiority is the goal for the Indian negotiators.

Leaving California: Director Steven Spielberg Joins Other Billionaires In The Big Adios

From the New York Post, February 19:

Legendary director Steven Spielberg is latest billionaire to flee California in another blow to state  

Steven Spielberg, phone home!

The legendary “E.T.” director and California resident has moved to Manhattan amid a billionaire exodus from the Golden State — as voters eye a controversial wealth tax.

But the move allegedly had nothing to do with the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, the Los Angeles Times reported. 

“Steven’s move to the East Coast is both long-planned and driven purely by his and Kate Capshaw’s desire to be closer to their New York-based children and grandchildren,” spokeswoman Terry Press told the outlet....

....MUCH MORE

Forbes has Mr. Spielberg at the the 208th spot on the Forbes 400 list with his net worth at $7.1 billion.

For some reason I thought his AUM was north of $10bil. but either way, the 5% tax would require a good-sized check. 

Opportunity Is Everywhere

Two From the Hegemon substack. First up the complete "How to monetize the rise of Medieval Peasant Brain," December 15, 2025: 

A short guide for the downwardly mobile elite 

Do you have the cultural capital of elite education, yet are now scraping by on gig economy scraps? Think of it as an arbitrage opportunity! As we leave the Gutenberg Parenthesis and enter a techno-feudal oral culture, their epistemic decay becomes your revenue stream.

• Stop writing immediately. Writing is for losers. Pivot entirely to oral/visual formats. Your voice and face are the artifacts of authority, not your citations.

• Do not fall into the trap of irony. The peasant brain cannot process irony; it reads it as vague malice. You must be post-ironic. You must inhabit the role so fully even you aren’t sure if you’re serious anymore.

• The peasant brain is terrified of a cold, godless universe. You can redirect that terror to more legible targets like immigrants or Jews, or sell them solutions that fit into a bottle. (the good news is you don’t have to choose)

• The peasantry feels sick and low-energy because they eat seed oils and doomscroll. But do they know that vitamins are an Ancestral Vitality Stack? Leverage your elite vocabulary to write that TikTok script. Remember it’s not magnesium it’s Mineral of the Stoics. This is the highest margin vertical for the downwardly mobile elite.

• The Court Jester Strategy. Instead of enchanting the peasants, you could entertain the new feudal lords. Becoming the intelligent pet of a tech billionaire is a wonderful sinecure. Use your humanities education to provide philosophical cover for their sociopathy. Quote Marcus Aurelius to justify intrusive surveillance, cite Machiavelli to explain a failed startup. They will pay handsomely to feel like philosopher kings instead of boring money-grubbers.

• The Trad Turn Strategy. The peasant fantasy is the Cottage. Monetize the aesthetic of a life you cannot afford. Champion the return to tradition for an audience trapped in daily squalor. Critique modernity (which is easy, because we can all see the ugliness) and curate images of past beauty (also easy, because all the ugliness disappears).

• Remember, you possess forbidden knowledge. You have read the scary books so they don’t have to. Allow yourself to be the conduit that brings the truth forward. Good luck, and happy holidays!

Possibly also of interest:

UPDATED--Are You a Recent Graduate Who Hasn't Found a Job? Consider Becoming a Charlatan 

And back to Hegemon, February 2, 2026:

The Epstein Files and Russiagate are the Same Thing

Wall Street Reactions To The Supreme Court IEEPA Tariff Decision

From Bloomberg, February 20:

It wasn’t a complete shock for markets. Yet the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down the cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s economic policy did create ripples across asset classes.

Treasuries and a Bloomberg gauge of the dollar fell, while stocks rallied, after the court struck down Trump’s sweeping global tariffs. The court said Trump exceeded his authority by invoking a federal emergency-powers law to impose his “reciprocal” tariffs across the globe as well as targeted import taxes the administration says address fentanyl trafficking.

One reason why market reactions were somewhat muted: Trading in predictions markets had been leaning toward this outcome at some point this year after justices asked critical questions about the legality of the tariffs in a hearing last year.

At the same time, many traders expected Friday’s market reactions to potentially be short-lived, since officials in the Trump administration have said that the White House had other legal options at its disposal to implement tariffs should the high court rule against the president. Shortly after the decision, Trump told attendees at a breakfast with governors that he had a backup plan, according to CNN....

*** 

....Here’s what investors and strategists across Wall Street are saying:

Ian Lyngen, Head of US Rates Strategy at BMO Capital Markets Corp

“The SCOTUS decision was widely anticipated by market participants and therefore it wasn’t surprising to see a limited response in US rates.”

James Athey, a Portfolio Manager at Marlborough Investment Management

“Pretty mild reaction so far. Market is not really sure what to do. The big issue would have been any notion of refunds.”

“I think this news is bearish UST at the margin. It’s a short term negative for the budget so should be bearish Treasuries. But it’s really hard to see how it would actually work - very complicated.”

Jane Foley, Head of FX Strategy at Rabobank

“Although the White House is expected to find another way to push on with tariffs, there will be concerns about refunds in the meantime and this could worry the Treasury market which could unsettle the USD given the US’s already weak fiscal position.”

Aroop Chatterjee, Managing Director at Wells Fargo Securities

“We expect relief from the SCOTUS ruling to be temporarily risk positive mostly via lower uncertainty. The administration retains significant tariff making authority via other statutes but some of these are untested and others will take time. We continue to think the administration will replace most tariffs via other means but this is over the medium-term.”

“Separately, we think the refund process will be very complicated and is unlikely to meaningfully boost growth/consumption near-term. Its hard to see this leading to trend shift in the USD in either direction. The market will likely refocus on incoming data that continues to point to an economy and labor market that is recovering. This keeps the Fed firmly on the sidelines and limits further USD weakness in our view.”

Dave Mazza, Chief Executive Officer at Roundhill Financial

“Markets will treat the tariff rollback as a near-term positive, because it takes an immediate tax off the supply chain and removes one headline overhang. But it’s not the end of the tariff story, it’s the start of the next chapter, and the path from here likely means more legal and policy whiplash, not less.”

Matt Maley, Chief Market Strategist at Miller Tabak + Co LLC

“A lot of investors have been expecting the Supreme Court to rule this way, so it seems like they are more focused on the situation in the Middle East going into this weekend. But yes, I do think it removes some uncertainty. What we’re seeing in the markets is more of a ‘buy the news’ reaction.”

....MUCH MORE, including Marc Chandler and:

Chris Murphy, Co-Head of Derivatives Strategy at Susquehanna International Group

“This ruling appears to have created more questions and we are not seeing a lot of convicted trades in the immediate aftermath. I do expect an epic truth social post coming soon, however.”

"EU Demands Russian Troop Withdrawal From Belarus, Georgia, Armenia and Transnistria in Ukraine Peace Framework"

 I don't think Russia is going to agree to that.

But maybe the EU is adopting Trumpian negotiating tactics: Ask for the moon and stars and accept the moon as an improvement on your current position.

The other interpretation is that the EU doesn't actually want peace in Ukraine which will lead to a lot more blood and treasure needed to feed the beast. 

From the Kyiv Post, February 19:

An internal EU paper circulated by Kaja Kallas calls for a ban on Russian military deployments in Belarus, Georgia, Armenia and Moldova’s Transnistria as part of any comprehensive Ukraine settlement. 

Content

• Ban on Russian military presence
• EU seeks seat at the table
• Reparations and accountability
• Ukraine’s EU path

The European Union is demanding that Russia withdraw its troops not only from Ukraine but also from Belarus, Georgia, Armenia and Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria region as part of any comprehensive peace deal.

The proposal is outlined in an internal discussion paper distributed to EU member states by the bloc’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, and seen by RFE/RL. The document is set to be discussed by EU ambassadors on Tuesday, Feb. 17, and may be debated further by foreign ministers on Feb. 23. 

The document sets out what Brussels believes Moscow must concede in ongoing US-mediated negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

Ban on Russian military presence
The paper calls for a “ban of Russian military presence and deployments in Belarus, Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, Georgia and Armenia,” as well as the removal of any nuclear weapons from Belarus.

Russian forces have long been stationed in Georgia’s breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, in Moldova’s Transnistria, at bases in Armenia, and in Belarus, which served as a launchpad for the 2022 invasion.

The document argues that if Ukraine is asked in negotiations to limit troop levels or demilitarize certain areas, Russia should face comparable obligations.

It also rejects any “de jure” recognition of occupied Ukrainian territories and calls for their demilitarization.

EU seeks seat at the table
Neither the EU nor its member states are formally represented in the US-led negotiations....

....MUCH MORE 

The EU could have bought a seat at the table had they supplied Ukraine back in 2022. Or 2023. Or 2024. 

Instead we got the half-a-loaf/permawar approach we were decrying as early as April 2022. Here are a couple posts from those days:

May 25, 2022
Maybe We Should Just Declare War On Russia And Take Their Stuff: Zoltan Pozsar on Russia As A "Global Systemically Important Bank" Of Commodities

None of the electorate in the NATO countries voted for another of these inconclusive, forever wars, so profitable for a select few and so costly in life and treasure for regular people. Surely no one in the developing nations signed on to pay for sanctions with their food budget. It is time to figure out a) What our goals are and b) What the hell we are doing, period and in furtherance of those goals. This isn't some game of RISK with let's try this, or let's try that and no consequences at the end of the night. Since the Maidan coup in 2014 the West has had eight years to plan for this.

Do it or don't do it; because trying to finesse a halfway reaction is nuts.

As the philosopher asked the generals and armaments producers some time ago: 

"When was the last time you b****es won a war?"

August 1, 2022
"No holidays for Ukraine: Financial needs increase"

The EU has to either go all-in or call a halt to what they are currently doing.

This halfway stuff does not work for anyone but the arms merchants and is just plain evil in terms of lives lost and livelihoods ruined. As the BSD's used to say: "Go big or go home."....

December 21, 2023
Industrial Disease: "The U.S. Can Afford a Bigger Military. We Just Can’t Build It"
For at least six months after it became apparent the Western strategy for Ukraine was to dribble enough armaments into the battle to slow the Russian takeover of the eastern third of Ukraine, but not enough for Ukraine to win, we were posting on this weird approach to war....

 

And the inevitable result:

June 5, 2023
Oh My God, What Are The Ukrainian Generals Doing?
They are ordering their men to attack defense-in-depth without air cover and 1/10th the artillery the troops need.... 

*We've mentioned the RAND study a few times including before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Here's March 25, 2022: 

The U.S. Is Implementing The RAND Corporation Strategy To Cripple Russia

First up, a refresher, from February 8, 2022 (pre-invasion): 

The RAND Corporation Blueprint For Forcing Putin To Over-Extend Himself

I hope that the U.S. or NATO or whoever commissioned this study didn't pay a lot for it, it's basically the strategy that Pope John Paul II, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan came up with in the early 1980's although the details do differ. The tactical components of the RAND plan are:

 1. Arming Ukraine ;
 2. Increase support for jihadists in Syria;
 3. Promoting regime change in Belarus;
 4. Exploiting tensions in the South Caucasus;
 5. Reducing Russian influence in Central Asia;
 6. Rivaling the Russian presence in Transnistria.

....MUCH MORE

The study is from 2019, its basic idea is to get Russia to overextend itself both militarily and more especially financially. 

On January 12, 2022 Victoria Nuland showed this approach is top-of-mind in the Biden Administration. From Interfax Ukraine:

Nuland: I'm going to let Russians speak for themselves how long they can financially back placement of troops near Ukraine

U.S. Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland did not make assumptions about how long the Russian Federation can afford to keep a large grouping of forces near Ukraine.

"I am going to let the Russians speak for themselves," she said, answering a question at a State Department briefing about "how long you think Russia can financially back the placement of troops along the Russia-Ukrainian border."

Nuland also said the transfer of a large group of forces to the border with Ukraine was not a cheap operation.

"These kind of deployments, hundred thousand troops out of barracks and on the Ukrainian border are extremely expensive, as is the deployment of this kind of weaponry in the cold winter," she said.

The U.S. goal is not peace in Ukraine.

The U.S. goal is regime change in Moscow, and in furtherance of that objective the U.S. is ready to fight to the last Ukrainian.

"Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs"

Only the dead have seen the end of tariffs.*  

Lifted in toto from ZeroHedge, February 20: 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down Trump's tariffs. In a 170-page decision and a 6-3 vote, the court ruled that Trump's use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) - which constitute about half of the tariffs we've seen under Trump - was not lawful.

"IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," wrote the court. 

The ruling stems from a consolidated challenge brought by small businesses and multiple states, who argued that the statute - originally intended to authorize sanctions and asset freezes during national emergencies - does not grant the executive branch the power to levy taxes on imports. Writing for the majority, the Court emphasized that the Constitution vests Congress alone with the authority to impose duties and tariffs, and found that IEEPA’s authorization to “regulate … importation” cannot be interpreted to include the distinct taxing power required to enact broad-based tariffs. As a result, the Court affirmed lower-court rulings blocking the challenged measures, concluding that the administration’s emergency-based tariff framework exceeded the limits of the statute.

Trump invoked IEEPA to impose his 'reciprocal' tariffs on nearly every foreign trade partner to address what he called a national emergency over US trade deficits. He invoked it again to impose tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico over fentanyl trafficking into the United States. 

During arguments on Nov. 5, the court seemed skeptical over Trump's authority to use IEEPA, leading most observers observers, including betting markets, to conclude a high probability they're struck down at least in part. The Trump administration is appealing lower court rulings that he overstepped his authority, while Trump himself said a Supreme Court ruling against the tariffs would be a "terrible blow" to the United States.

Other Options

That said, even if that happens, the Trump administration has several other legal avenues they can pursue. As Deutsche Bank noted last month; 

For instance, the sectoral tariffs (e.g. on steel and aluminum) aren’t covered by the court ruling, whilst another option would be to use Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which permits temporary 15% tariffs for 150 days. 

 And Goldman:

This won’t be the end of tariffs… the administration will almost certainly roll out alternative legal frameworks. Net result is probably slightly fewer tariffs, materially more trade uncertainty, and some incremental deficit concerns. Net-net, that’s mildly supportive for equities and mildly negative for bonds… but largely priced for both.

The cases under consideration by the Supremes were brought by businesses affected by the tariffs and 12 mostly blue US states. 

*Once again repurposing Santayana's pithy little aphorism: "Only the dead have seen the end of war." 

"Only the dead have seen the end of war".

attributed to Plato from the 1930s on, especially following a speech by General Douglas MacArthur at West Point, 12 May 1962 crediting him, but not found in Plato's works; Santayana is the earliest known source

Soliloquies in England and Later Soliloquies (1922) ‘Tipperary’

—Oxford Essential Quotations

"Nvidia is moving in on Intel and AMD's home turf" (NVDA; INTC; AMD; META)

The market may not have fully absorbed this news when it crossed the tape a couple days ago.*

From Yahoo Finance, February 20: 

Nvidia (NVDA) has sealed an expanded, multiyear data center agreement with Meta (META) that will see the chipmaker supply the social media giant with millions of its Blackwell and Rubin GPUs.

And while that was certainly the splashiest part of Tuesday's news, the companies said the agreement will also see Meta roll out Nvidia Grace CPU-only servers in its data centers, the first large-scale deployment of the chips.

Grace is the processor that Nvidia pairs with two Blackwell or two Blackwell Ultra GPUs to form its GB200 and GB300 AI superchips.

The Grace-only servers come at a time when Nvidia is angling to capitalize on the growing demand for traditional CPUs as hyperscalers increasingly look to the chips to help power some AI inferencing and agentic AI applications.

That spells trouble for Intel (INTC), which has long dominated the data center CPU space, and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), which is working to take market share from Intel.

"Nvidia has been on the path of providing more of the content in the data center for a while," Gil Luria, managing director and head of technology at D.A. Davidson, told Yahoo Finance.

"The addition of Mellanox [a networking company Nvidia acquired in 2020] put them into the networking category as well," he said. "So when they sell into the data center, they're actually selling almost a vast majority of the value. But it makes sense for them to increase that value even further by adding CPU capacity."

Nvidia's move couldn't come at a worse time for Intel, which is dealing with capacity constraints that are keeping it from producing enough CPUs to meet data center builders' demand....

....MUCH MORE
*February 18 - "Why Nvidia’s deal with Meta is an ‘Intel killer,’ according to this analyst" (NVDA; META; ARM; INTC; AVGO)

Here's the last month of INTC price action via TradingView: