I think there is way too much ink written on the "circular financing" narrative. The only unique point of these relationships is just the sheer size and scale. As an example, there is so much fud around the ORCL CDS which rose to 100 bps. But why is there no detail or press on what the implied default probability is for such a CDS rate beyond the "scare" headline?? Its because this implies a 1.6% probability of default!! Not scary at all....
Now, is it really circular financing? NO. Its not at all like the dot com days... For example, the OAI and NVDA Deal: Cash ultimately originates from external capital (eg venture) and AI customers, which flows to OAI then to NVDA for real revenues in exchange for real equipment, which is needed to support the real customer demand. This is economically different from a fake loop where a company secretly funds a customer purely to book cosmetic revenues w/o business value.
This AI doom and gloom is all fud, and the key thing to watch is token demand / revenue generation by the AI cos. As of now, its exponential growth and demand, both from growing usage, agentic AI, increasing intelligence/use cases. Once token demand stops growing exponentially, then there is potentially overbuild worries, which likely will happen someday but not for a few years.
The narrative of accelerated depreciation is also pure FUD. This is written and discussed by many others...