part1_00-10m

The article "Investing in the Age of AI" discusses the impact of artificial intelligence on investment strategies. It highlights the concept of strong versus weak mote companies, emphasizing how AI reduces friction for strong mote companies, enhancing their profitability and future optionality. The argument is that strong mote companies will outperform weak mote companies in the age of AI due to their ability to expand into new fields and monetize them efficiently. The article also touches on the idea of scarcity versus abundance, predicting that truly scarce properties will continue to outperform abundant properties in a world of economic growth and technological advancement. I want to present an article called Investing in the Age of AI. So basically the first sort of heading would be called Abundant Free Intelligence and Strong Economic Growth. The basic argument here is with AI we have entered into an era of free superintelligence and that the basic working assumptions are that intelligence will be free and there is very strong worldwide economic growth, 10% a year or more, which is far more than we've all been used to during our lifetimes. So the question is well in that world how does that impact our investment allocations? And so I'm going to make arguments in this article for a few different things. So the second heading would be called Strong Motes, Weak Motes. The basic argument here is that in terms of investing in companies, some companies have very strong motes, enduring motes that competitors struggle to compete with and others have weak motes. Obviously free intelligence also impacts which companies have motes. The free intelligence actually reduces some companies' motes that would have otherwise been strong. Like for example the classic one is SAS companies that have seen their multiples to revenues drop. But the basic argument here is that there will be a continued bifurcation between strong mote companies and weak mote companies. Even more than historically the strong mote companies will outperform, whereas the weak mote companies will underperform as their whatever competitive advantages they have or pricing power they have just gets competed away. The reason the strong mote companies outperform is that if you think about a company that has a really strong mote, the thing that's stopping them from being more profitable is not necessarily competition but it's just friction. It's the friction of having to have staff. It's basically the friction of monetising their existing competitive advantage and that friction is going to be reduced with artificial intelligence. The other thing that happens is when you have a really strong mote it actually opens up future optionality to you, future optionality to go into adjacent fields where you have a competitive advantage to new adjacent fields. Now what the impact that artificial intelligence has on that optionality is it makes it much more valuable. So for example take SpaceX. They have this enduring mote in that they can launch things into space cheaper than any other company because they've got reusable rockets. So the initial monetisation of that was just to charge people to launch things into space and earn revenue that way. Then they found out they have started to monetise one of their options of Starlink but what AI has done is it's increased the value of that optionality of their mote. So their mote is that they can launch things into space cheaper than anybody else but now that we have AI the value of that mote is so much greater because now they can have data centres in space. They can colonise the moon and build things on the moon. They can harness power from the sun. So that's just an example of why really strong mote companies are going to outperform in the age of AI. It's basically partly because they can reduce the friction in monetising their existing business but also because the value of their optionality, the value of new adjacent fields that they can go into and profit from has just gone way up. The same can actually be applied to Tesla although it's slightly less direct but they have an enduring mote in real world AI in terms of their autonomous driving ability. But now that we have artificial intelligence they're going to be able to more quickly expand into fields like cyber cab and also robotics and humanoid robots faster than they would have otherwise been able to. So their ability to go into these new adjacent spaces and monetise them has increased with artificial intelligence. So basically we're going to see – the argument is there's actually an increase in bifurcation. There's always a bifurcation in strong mote companies versus weak mote companies. The strong motes grow and that's factored into the different price to earnings multiples. But the difference is now AI makes that bifurcation even more extreme. Weak mote companies will have their motes competed away and strong mote companies will not only profit more from their existing business because of reduced friction but they'll be able to more quickly expand into new adjacent fields and monetise them. So that's basically the argument with two examples. So the kind of companies that have weak motes are basically most like – most indexes especially those outside the US. So I mean you could argue that the NASDAQ 100 is really full of mostly strong mote companies. So you're probably okay investing in the NASDAQ 100 even though maybe 20, 30% of the companies like the fast companies have pretty weak motes. But most other index funds around the world would invest in companies that aren't really particularly strong. So I think the strong mote companies that can benefit from AI are just going to continue to outperform even if they're a little bit expensive now. And most other companies just general like the FTSE 100 or the DAX or the Nikkei or the ASX 200, I just think they're going to underperform relative to the top companies in the world. The second area is scarcity versus abundance. So again this is a similar story where scarcity has always outperformed abundance. So goods that are truly scarce generally outperform over the long term. But I think there's going to be an increasing bifurcation and this can be applied to many fields. So for example take property. The kinds of properties that are abundant are just your generic residential property in an outer suburb sitting around the median house price or below. With AI it's eventually going to be much more cheaper to build. So if a lot of the value of the house is in the value of the build rather than the land that will underperform. B grade and C grade commercial property, random offices on the 17th floor of a building, retail properties that aren't on the main strip or in a major area with a lot of ... All of these things will just become more abundant in a world of economic growth. Whereas truly scarce properties, so beachfront properties in big cities or your top 5, 10% of median house price neighbourhoods, your Manhattan apartment overlooking the park. But also industrial properties in major city centres that are close to major cities in areas that are built out where there's no more available land. That's probably the best commercial property play. Kind of city based industrial property where there's no more land available. So scarce property will continue to massively outperform abundant property. Again, there'll be a similar kind of bifurcation but I would argue even more extreme than historically because we're going to be able to build really cheaply. We're probably going to be able to develop in areas outside of the cities very, very cheaply, maybe even build new cities. So low value properties, abundant properties will fade out in value but scarce property with so much more money in the world will achieve outsized returns. Then the next heading is the site ...