As a 3rd-party, curious observer, I have several naive, unanswered questions about the Stargate project. Obviously understand that they have no obligation to disclose. Here is list with responses wide open. I would love to be able to aggregate the best answers at some point.
1. Corporate Structure
The OpenA press release says that Stargate is "a new company." Is Stargate established as a standard C-corp, LLC, a joint venture, or something else entirely?
2. CEO Leadership
Will Stargate have an independent CEO? Who will lead Stargate on a daily basis, and how is that person chosen? Will they be as operationally intense as the XAI team that launched Memphis?
3. Customer Exclusivity
Is OpenAI the sole customer, or will Stargate yearn to serve other businesses? Does Microsoft’s deal with OpenAI impose any exclusivity constraints (the Microsoft release suggests it may)?
4. Operating Partner Role
Release says OpenAI is the “operating partner.” What does that mean in practical terms—are they running day-to-day operations, technology decisions, or something else? If they have full control this would require consolidation as a public co.
5. Oracle’s Day-to-Day Involvement
What specific role is Oracle playing? Are they providing infrastructure, software, strategic guidance, financial backing? What pieces of their software are being utilized? Did Oracle previously own the Abilene, Texas assets?
6. Comparison to CoreWeave
What kind of business is Stargate? Is it effectively a direct competitor to CoreWeave’s AI hosting approach, or is it structured and positioned differently? If so, how is it different?
7. Debt Usage
Will Stargate employ significant debt financing? (Equinix is around 1:1 debt-to-equity, while CoreWeave is rumored to go as high as 3:1 or 4:1.) What level of risk will this entity assume?
8. Appeal to Third-Party Investors
If 3rd parties invest (as release suggests), what’s the ROI for them? Is there a guaranteed spend from OpenAI? Are other customers lined up (unusual to have an investible company with 1 customer)? How do these investors get liquidity?
9. Standalone & Potential “Round-Tripping”
If this isn’t intended to be a stand-alone public company, how do outside investors eventually recoup their investment? Does funding from strategic partners essentially pay for their own product usage (i.e., classic “round-tripping”)?
10. Pre-training vs Inference & Data Center Structure
Do we need ever-increasing larger clusters? Do data limits & parameter count limits reduce this need? Does "inference-most" imply a new architecture? Do Deepseek & Bytedance releases suggests performance can cost much less?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
You can frequently read articles referencing VC "dry powder" and inferring that these large dollar amounts are "burning a hole" in someone's pocket & will imminently find their way to the market. I totally understand the assumption, but things don't really work this way. [cont]
First and foremost, undrawn VC dollars are not on the IRR clock. There is no urgency to draw them down. The money isn't actually at the VC firm, they are still sitting in the coffers at the LPs. No VC firm I have ever been exposed to feels "pressure" to "get dollars to work."
On the back of a market reset, & w/ portfolio valuations being slashed, GPs are mostly sharing bad news w/ LPs. No GP wants to look aggressive/carefree. Imagine being a teenager with two speeding tickets & a fender-bender insisting on taking the new family car out Saturday night.
Some (below) are arguing US capitalism would be better off if SVB had completely failed (also wiping out depositors). History suggests that out gov't treated big banks (2008) & big airlines (2020) FAR BETTER than SVB - in both cases fully protecting EQUITY shareholders. (cont)
In 2008, during the GFC, our gov't bailed out most of the major money center banks. Equity shareholders & bondholders kept whole. GS received help AFTER they received a preferred investment from Warren Buffet. Here is the real kicker (cont). investopedia.com/insights/too-b…
The GFC was the result of a specific flawed financial product that was an "offering" of these same banks. So far, the identified SVB failure was a bad risk management process. In the GFC case, the "bailed-out" players directly benefited from the flawed product.
As people come to terms with the weight of our new environment, they are slowly beginning to realize how radically things have changed. One area in particular that has changed - the required level of "corporate performance" needed to simply survive (let alone thrive). 🧵
2/ Building startups WAS a historically difficult endeavor (see chart). The past 5 years things have been "much, much easier." Cash was easy to come by (round frequency unprecedented), & no one was held to any profit goals, yet many companies still received high valuations.
3/ Cash is now hard to come by; investors are expecting solid unit economics & earlier profitability. Everything is immediately 5-10X harder. As such, survival is now depedent on hard-core, disciplined, top decile business execution, which no one learned in the past 5 years.
Many people are sharing great @Coach_Leach videos of his funny quips, but there are three things about him that in my mind stand above his unquestionably great humor. First he touched many lives 1-1. He took the time. Great stories like this abound:
Second, his coaching tree is immense. Many that learn an art/skill hide their secrets deep. But none of us learn if there are no teachers. Mike's willingness to give back to the sport he loved is nearly unprecedented. A great sign of a life well lived. hailstate.com/news/2022/10/1…
Lastly, Michael Lewis once called Mike Leach "a national treasure." It's hard to imagine that a college football coach could bring so much intrigue & happiness to so many people. I watched every game I could. So sad he is gone. So happy to see the universal love. 🏴☠️
Enjoyed e106 of @theallinpod. On FTX, I think they nailed a few important things: 1) Contradiction between smartest man in the room (pre) & "aw-shucks I don't know much" (post) 2) Sophistication of the corporate org (in size, scope, etc) also inconsistent with "aw-shucks" (cont)
3) Agree that SBF has built confidence in talking his way out of things. That said, doing voluntary depositions is a really bad idea. 4) One thing I don't think enough people mention - he intentionally created/discouraged proper governance. He insisted on no board, etc. (cont)
Interesting idea that he achieved things AS A RESULT of having a privileged upbringing. Probably impossible to prove, but certainly the credentials of his schools and his family relationships were helpful along the way. open.spotify.com/episode/75monu…
Having survived two previous market resets (2001, 2009), people frequently ask me how this 2022 market reset is different and how it is the same. The obvious similarity is that valuation multiples have collapsed. We went from a "glass very full" mindset to one with many concerns.
Alternatively, the window of ultra-low interest rates that fueled the rise (now rising) was unprecedented in business history. This led to ample speculation. It also created valuations we are quite unlikely to revisit. People will have a hard time letting go of those prices.
Similar to 2009, the founders & executives that run VC backed companies have been quick to recognize and adjust. They understand that the cost of capital just went way up & that high cash burn rates are now impossible. The "game on the field" has changed & they are adjusting.