Power Lunch - Nvidia holds GTC 10/28/25

Episode Date: October 28, 2025

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and Palantir CEO Alex Karp discuss the companies' partnership. UPS stock rises after earnings.  And is there anywhere in the market that is overvalued?  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The rising tide of big technology, keep lifting markets and hopefully your money. Welcome to Power Lunch, everybody. I am Brian Kelly is off today, and we are here in the capital of AI. San Francisco all week long to bring you on the ground inside and exclusive interviews. You will not get anywhere else. All this as the NASDAQ, S&P and Dow, all rocket to more new highs. Six of the Mag 7 or higher. AI news powering the trade, but what's new?

Hey, Apple gaining more momentum for demand for the iPhone 17. Microsoft hire Open AI completing its recapitalization. Remember, Microsoft owns 27% of OpenAI. That valuation soaring both Apple and Microsoft hitting the $4 trillion mark at some point today. That's a lot of dollars. Amazon, by the way, also higher, even as it announces, it's laying off thousands. We'll get more on that in minutes. Secretary of the Interior, Doug Bergam, also here exclusively. We'll talk about how America can win the AI arms race from within. Oh, and if that wasn't enough, those two guys, Nvidia CEO Jensen Wong, Alex Carp and Palantir, they're coming up as well. That is a big hour, folks. Welcome. I hope we having a great Tuesday. There is a lot to do, but let's begin with more record highs for the macro markets, and we love being out West for many reasons. In one part, though, because we get to speak in person to one of our favorite market.

That is Mike Co. Chief Strategist, Openinterest.Pro, CNBC contributor, just general all-around great guy. Mike, it's good to see you on set or it's good to be here. I can't decide which is which. This is great. You didn't stop by though on your way to Napa. Oh, I had a blimp chasing me, apparently. This is a big deal. Okay. Ray Diallo earlier today, sort of making more comments that maybe there's a bubble. Maybe AI is creating a bubble. Is the macro stock market in a bubble? Yes or no? No, I don't think it is. I mean, look, there's a big, we were talking about it right before we came on. I think there's a big difference between something being expensive and something being valuable. We have a lot of companies that have gotten very valuable, but there's a good reason for it. I mean, we're seeing margins and profit generation that we have not experienced before. I lived through the tech bubble.

We saw a lot of very rich valuations then. We're nowhere close to that now. Consider, Cisco, at his peak, was trading more than 200 times. earnings. Now we've got names like Nvidia that are trading it less than 30 times earnings on 30% year-on-year growth. And that's down, by the way, from where it was before. So we're not seeing any slowdown on the Cap-back side. In fact, I think some of the Amazon layoffs probably relate to that, too. We'll get that in a second. Fair enough. But the market, what about us, right? Because a lot of comparisons to Cisco in 99, it was at that time the most valuable

company in the world. I get it. Is it fair to compare that to this? Can they, They both be independently bubbles, even if you relate them to each other. I think that's what market bears might argue. Well, I think what makes a bubble? There's two things. One is completely irrational valuations. And I don't think we're necessarily at the irrational valuation part. That's the first aspect.

The second thing is, are we dealing with something that is just a blip on the screen? In other words, is this a short-term event? What would be an example of something like that? Pfizer and Moderna with vaccines, obviously the bloom is off that rose now. You know, what happened with Zoom? I happen to like Zoom as it happens. I think the thing is cheap. It's got a lot of cash on the balance sheet.

But that was another story where you had a pandemic bubble related. The peloton's the world, everybody rushing irrationally into things because we did things for a short period of time. idiosyncratic events that get people overly enthusiastic about a theme. Are we overly enthusiastic about AI? I don't think the answer is yes. Why not? Well, first of all, I think that it is 100% going to be a part of the new economy. And, you know, we're not, again, valuing these business because people would say, and you probably will say, well, that's what everyone said about Cisco.

The Internet of things, and that was going to be the new thing. And, of course, Internet obviously did end up changing. I was actually going to argue about radios and railroads, right? 1880s railroads, early 1900s radio. Everybody knows those things are going to be part of the economy forever. But there was a flurry. there was a mania around those things. Yeah, there's a little bit of a difference there.

I mean, first of all, the railroads were heavily. There was some government investment there that basically said you can help out. And then when they actually took the turn, there was a massive infrastructure spend on the highway system, right? Which took a little bit away. If we had not done that, that probably would have changed things a little bit as well. So, you know, the way I look at the railroads and things like that, relative to what you what we have right now is, you know, you could have had kind of a utility growth eventually. You sort of build the whole thing out and then you have a utility.

Yeah. And I think we are going to have that and we do have businesses that are like that now. We're going to hear from Jensen Wong in a few minutes. Is Nvidia overvalue? No. Is Amazon overvalue? Definitely not. Is Apple overvalue?

You know, that one I'm a little bit struggling with. We're trading it 32, 33 times. Now, in their defense, there's a couple of things that are working. Number one, it does look like the iPhone 17 is creating more of the refresh cycle that everybody hoped for with previous iterations. That's the first thing. Second thing is we are seeing better top line growth. I mean, we're looking at 6, 7%. To me, when I look at a company and I say, okay, am I interested in this company relative to the S&P?

It's got to grow the top line faster than the S&P does, which is about 6 to 7% on average. And it's got to grow adjusted EPS again faster than the S&P does. Otherwise, why wouldn't I just own the S&P, which is well diversified? and I don't have to pick. And Apple actually has admittedly kind of caught up on that metric, but it's still trading a couple turns richer, and I'm not sure that's as justified. Speaking of buying the market and speaking of being rich,

this brings us to a guy named Warren Buffett, upstart at Omaha, Nebraska, Berkshire Hathaway. You argue that if you are, our viewers, listeners, whatever, are in a camp where maybe they're a little bit nervous, now they're going to have some extra cash. you think Berkshire Hathaway, I assume you mean both A and B shares, you can delineate, that that is a great place to be right now. How come? So, first of all, they just got a downgrade. I get some of the things that people are saying about it.

A couple things to remember about this company. So we're dealing with a trillion-dollar market capitalization, about a half-a-trillion-dollar enterprise value. So the company is carrying, depending on your measure, but there's probably close to a half a trillion dollars of cash equivalence on their balance sheet on balance, $350 billion in actual cash. When you look at how much the company is going to earn next year, which is probably going to be in the neighborhood of about $46 billion, I would yank out your anticipated interest income. Let's just call it $22 billion to keep the math easy, right? So that leaves us with $23 billion on a half a trillion dollar enterprise value. That's not a bad turn. We're talking about 22 times earnings, but the benefit

that Berkshire has is that this is a business that is ready to deploy capital. So if we do get a pullback in asset prices, they're well positioned to take advantage of that. And the nice thing about Berkshire is that they always get the call. Their phone rings first when distress comes. Who did Goldman's? They are the bank. They're the bank. They're the bank. They were during subprime, right? We need help. We don't want to go to the public bond markets or we can't. Warren Buffett, give us some cash. Here's some warrants. Here's some preferred stock. Boom. The preferreds he got in Goldman were the worst thing that could happen to him was that those things would actually get converted, right? So he was getting great terms on those. People are concerned because Charlie's out,

unfortunately, and Warren's going to be leaving at the end of the year. But I think he is well-positioned because the people he has set up to run this company are people he's worked with for a long time. They know the MO, and these are operators. Okay, so Nvidia's not a bubble, Amazon's not a bubble, Apple you're still working on, Berkshire can be the thing. What is the next thing that Mike Coe is watching. AI, let me ask it a different way. Today is the first day of a two-day Federal Reserve meeting. Tomorrow we get the interest rate decision, more rate cuts expected.

Pick one. It's like the dating game. AI, the Federal Reserve. What's more important? For tomorrow, it's the Federal Reserve, and actually the way I think I would play that is local. It's Wells Fargo. How so?

Well, I mean, Wells Fargo. First of all, we've seen a lot of strength out of the banks, But the interesting thing about Wells Fargo is because they had all of these regulatory prohibitions against them because they got into trouble, which a lot of people remember a couple years ago. And because of that, they were not able to be- Well, I would say opening up accounts for people that didn't want them open. It was kind of a thing. Don't do that. Things happened that they shouldn't have happened.

Mistakes were made. Mistakes were made. Exactly right. But if you take a look at their balance sheet right now, they actually did not expand in something like their helix and a lot of the other stuff that's on their balance sheet. It has actually gone down over the course of the last 10 years. It's grown everywhere else. So when people start talking about concerns in the consumer credit space, this is, first of all, they're trading cheaper than J.P. Morgan. And I understand that J.P. Morgan always earns, like, you know,

best-debreed, premium. But I think Wells Fargo is probably positioned because they haven't been growing. Now they're allowed to. They haven't been putting a lot of junk on their balance sheet because they couldn't. And I just think it's a good place to be in financials when the yield curve steepens. And for now, still going for the hometown homer. They are moving a lot of people to Irving, Texas. but for now, we've got a San Francisco-based company. That's right. Let's hope they stay here because the city does feel like it's coming around. We talked to Vidia, Apple, Amazon, Berkshire Athewey, Wells Fargo.

Nobody can do it by you. Mike Co. Thank you. Thanks for you. Appreciate that. All right. Before we head to break, let's talk about the bond market ahead of tomorrow's Fed meeting, the decision on rates. It is likely we all get another interest rate cut tomorrow.

Ahead of that, though, tenure yields. They're not moving a whole lot. 3.98 holding steady just under 4%. That meeting tomorrow, Another big one, what the Fed signals about the December meeting, maybe even bigger. Odds of another rate cut, still just under 90% there. All right, we've got a lot to do coming up from San Francisco. Some big power players on deck.

We're going to be joined by NVIDIA, CEO Jensen Wong, Palantir CEO Alex Carp, all ahead in the show. But before that, Interior Secretary Doug Bergam is here with how America can really use policy to help win the AI arms race. The Secretary of the Interior is next. All right, welcome back to Power Lunch. If you need to know just how critical AI and its architecture and infrastructure are to America, look no further than Nvidia. Invidia today holding its big technology conference, not here in San Francisco, not at its headquarters in Silicon Valley, but in Washington, D.C.

This is the first time that event, which some people call the Super Bowl of AI, has happened in America's capital. This shift east should and could be a big hint to how critical policy is to winning the AI future. CEO Jensen Wong will be joining us in just a few minutes, but let's talk about the Department of Interior and how government policy and how they can help power and ensure that we win this future. Joining us now in an exclusive interview is U.S. Interior Secretary Bergam. Secretary Bergam, really appreciate you rejoining us. You famously said kind of a few months ago that, quote, knowledge used to be power. Now power, it's knowledge.

You're highlighting how all the energy and electricity needed to actually run AI is so critical. How do we make sure that that lives here in the United States? What can you, your department and your team do to make sure we win that? Well, it's not just my incredible team here at Interior. It's also the whole of government energy policy touches virtually every agency. And that's why President Trump created the National Energy Dominance Council was in part a response to his understanding that we needed more power to win the AIA arms race against China. And, of course, having an opportunity to help serve as chairman of the NEDC, the National Energy Dominance Council, we are working on looking at policies. We're looking at public lands.

We're looking at everything we can do to make sure that we're driving energy. prices down at home, increasing supply for AI. And then President Trump working alongside of Secretary Bessett and Lutnik and Commerce and Treasury, driving energy diplomacy around the world. Jameson Greer, are a great trade representative. I mean, President Trump is stopping conflicts all over the world. So it's literally peace abroad, prosperity at home. When the AA arms race, it all starts with energy policy of the Trump administration. What do you make of NVIDIA? having this massive conference in your backyard, in Washington, D.C. Well, I think it's super smart on their part because in the last administration,

there was an anti-energy policy. The Biden administration left behind essentially a plan where we were going to be continuing to shut down electricity production in this country, trying to replace reliable, affordable base load with intermittent, highly subsidized, weather dependent sources of electricity, you can't win the AI arms race. AI needs 7 by 24 by 365 power. So does America. So does advanced manufacturing.

So under President Trump, it's been 180-degree turn. And we've gone from a year ago at this time, Brian, there was an LNG export ban on in America. Now we're facing this country just in the 10 months, first 10 months, 25% increase in LNG exports. I just met this morning with virtually every ambassador. from the EU in one breakfast, all of them are basically saying, hey, thank you, America, because LNG exports from the U.S. to the EU have helped to place their purchase of Russian gas and taking away Russians' funding source for the war against Ukraine is how that battle is going to

end. And so, again, literally, peace abroad, prosperity at home. We're delivering it here thanks to the incredible energy sector that we have. And they're the group that's also going to provide the power for these AI to support the market capitalizations of these big tech companies that are based on AI. They need electricity. Which are all literally based sort of right around where we are sitting right now in San Francisco. I'm going to get that in a second. I want to go back to your meeting this morning.

Did your EU representatives, did they indicate the ability and the willingness, because they're different things, to buy more U.S. gas, to buy some U.S. oil? now that there's new sanctions on two huge Russian oil companies? Well, yes, and the EU is committed to stopping their purchases of Russian oil and gas that are more serious about it than ever. They've accelerated the timeline to do that. What we have to do, and we talked about this morning, particularly in Eastern Europe, is make sure that we're building the infrastructure. If we can ship all this LNG out of America, they've got the ability to receive it, but then we've got to get the pipelines built, particularly into Eastern Europe, call it,

the north-south corridor, but starting up north with the Baltics, with Poland, and heading all the way down to Greece, Croatia, and everything in between, we've got to have some vertical north-south pipelines. Right now, those pipelines are running east to west. They're carrying Russian LNG. These countries, particularly the landlocked ones, that can't take LNG off of a ship, we need to help them build the infrastructure they need, and certainly the capital is there. Europe's committed $750 billion of energy-related. The NATO 5% goal that President Trump got all these countries to agree to, 1.5% of that 5%, 3.5% is defense, 1.5% is infrastructure.

They've got the capital to help build that infrastructure. Chris Wright and I are going to be in Europe again next week at a big conference in Greece, again, talking with all the energy ministers that are there, making sure that we get this infrastructure so that we can exit. export more, and then talk about Asia. You know, we've got deals being signed as we speak as the president is traveling through Asia to buy Alaska LNG when the Alaska LNG pipeline is completed. We can get to that in just one second as well. I do want to ask about this because we're here in San Francisco, Mr. Secretary, AI is transforming and transformed this city.

There's so much excitement, so much enthusiasm. Here's the, and California may be the perfect example because it's a state that often has its own energy and permitting issues. You've worked with FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to speed up permitting. So that's the thing. How do we make sure, how do you make sure in your office help, make sure that the companies that are based here, the dreams they've got hundreds of billions of investor capital, and you are a businessman in a previous life, that that money is actually put to use because power lines can actually be built. don't take a decade. Well, it's a permitting has been something that's really held back our economy in this country.

Horizontal infrastructure, power lines, as you mentioned, Brian, gas transmission lines, those pipelines. There's a whole industry that's been weaponized to try to use regulatory attacks, whether it's endangered species, whether it's the, the NEPA environmental protection to try to stop building infrastructure in this country. If that environment had existed 150 years ago, California wouldn't have been opened up by the transcontinental railroad. In the 1960s, we wouldn't have the interstate highway system. We've got to be able to build horizontal infrastructure in this country. But part of the innovation that's coming from the tech companies is they're moving to where the energy is

because if you go to a place where we've got stranded gas, you've got turbines, you take gas, you convert it to electricity, and then you take that electricity. And for the first time in history, you can take electricity and turn it into an intelligence. They're not really data centers. These are intelligence factories. We need more of those intelligence factories to compete with China.

And they're going to end up in states that have pro-energy policies. And then their finished product, which is intelligence, is going to get shipped around the country on high-speed fiber optic cables, as opposed to that lengthy time it takes to move the electricity

to California and then move the intelligence back out. I mean, people are moving. The capital of the big five tech companies, the five of them together, 384 billion of CAPX, that CAPX is flowing towards the states that have got really pro-energy and pro-electric generation policies. Some of that's going to Iowa today because Next Era Energy, NE is the ticker and Google. Everybody knows them making a deal to restart the Dwayne Arnold nuclear power plant, but that's a private sector deal. Very quickly, any update on the Alaska LNG project, since you and I toward that in person with the Secretary of Energy up there in the Arctic Circle. And there we are back in June. Well, great progress occurring both in Alaska, but also on the trip to Asia

right now. Multiple deals have been signed, letters of intent. I think almost half the capacity has been committed for. This is an LNG tanker coming out of Anchorage. to Tokyo. It's eight days. It's a secure line protected by American shipping lanes versus 25 to 28 days coming out of the Middle East for Japan. Japan's got 120 million people in the space of North and South Dakota, no oil and gas. South Korea, 51 million people in half the size of North Dakota. They've got no oil and gas. And so you're going to continue to see deals, you know, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, all of our traditional post-World War II Pacific neighbors, all. will benefit from being able to have LNG from Alaska the same way Europe is benefiting

from taking it off of the Gulf of America. Well, so a big day out there in D.C. The EU ministerial meeting you were just talking about the Advidia GTC conference happening. Secretary of the Interior, Doug Bergam. Really a pleasure to have you on. CNBC again, Mr. Secretary. Thank you. Have a great day.

You too, Brian. Thank you. Always great to be with you. All right. Thank you very much. We've got a lot more to do here, Power Lunch, live from San Francisco. We're back right after this. All right, welcome back to Power Lunch. We're live in San Francisco. Just a programming note.

We are expecting to hear from Jensen Wong of Nvidia and Palantir CEO Alex Karp with Christina Portsenevolos in just a couple of minutes. But right now, we're going to bring you more exclusive content and interviews from CNBC and CBC.com. What we did is we found the hottest stocks in San Francisco over the past three months. And we're going to bring you so the newsmakers of the companies behind them. New names, names you've probably never talked about. Your first one, the CEO of Cito They help discover and develop drugs to treat things like muscle disease. Stockspin on foiego. It's up 60% in just the past three months.

That was a mystery chart that we had on earlier in the program. Here for a Power Lunch exclusive is Robert Blum. He is the CEO of cytokinetics. Robert, really appreciate you coming in. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. Okay. And so non-MD or scientists speak, what does CYTK do?

What problems are you trying to solve? So ours is a company that's focused, as you said, to muscle biology, in particular as relates to specialty heart disease. So we're developing potential new medicines that may impact cardiovascular conditions. And I understand with this new candidate, new drug, that you are in the same space as a much larger competitor, publicly traded Bristol Myers, BMI. Is this viewed as a competitor to them? How do we look at this? Because Bristol, is a big company. Absolutely, and we have profound respect for all that they're doing. They're actually commercializing a medicine that was discovered in our laboratories, and ultimately,

the subject of a company we formed that they acquired. They're now selling that, doing a great job. Patients are benefiting from that medicine. We're now in the process of developing a next generation medicine that would hopefully enter the same space. It's in front of the FDA for a potential approval later this year. Our goal is to bring it to patients and hopefully expand the number of physicians comfortable prescribing these medicines for the benefit of more patients. Biotech is a really hard space to cover because every company is so different. There's so much science that's involved. So if I ask a dumb question, maybe there's a drug for that. We'll see. So let's see. You created a drug in your labs, but then spun it off, which was then sold to Bristol

Myers. Why would you, why would you do that? And is it? Is this new drug a similar type situation where the drug or a new company or your company could be ultimately sold to Bristol Myers? So you're asking two good questions. Firstly, as it relates to the first one, we're looking at a company now, cytokinetics that's been around for 27 years. You're not like a new biotech startup. Nobody's going to ever accuse us of being an overnight success. To get to a place today where we could be on the doorstep of turning the page, ultimately, making our medicines available to patients, we had to travel a journey. That journey required

us to do a number of things as we invested in research and development and ultimately did some financial engineering in order to support the billions of dollars that we've spent advancing a portfolio of potential medicines. Along the way, we partnered, and in this particular instance, we formed a company that was funded by venture capital, They sponsored us to do work. That company spun out of our laboratories. They developed a medicine that came out of our research. BMS acquired it.

Now, from that same research platform, we're advancing a next generation opportunity that we hope will be available to patients later this year. It could dramatically expand the number of patients who could benefit from our science. I understand from research reports that not all the market, like the previous royalty deal that you did. I think it's royalty farm. I think was actually the name of the company. So what did you learn from that that will enable you to change maybe the way you approach future commercialization opportunities? Some analysts might suggest that deal had weighed on the stock in the past. It did, albeit for a short period, and that has everything to do

with what I was just saying. The financial engineering alongside of the research and development, at cytokinetics, they've gone hand in hand over these plus. 25 years. So we've raised primarily non-equity dilutive capital to get to this place. Ours is a company that hopefully has set a high watermark for how we access capital, how we deploy capital, capital structure friendly to shareholders, enabling of us to build a pipeline of potential medicines, the first one, hopefully coming to patients later this year. That's the forward edge of a pipeline of multiple medicines built on the same. same science and as could be available to patients over successive product launches.

As a biotech CEO, you've got to kind of worry about multiple things, obviously, but on a macro scale, you've got the science, the medicine, you want to make sure it works, right? You could get approved and commercialize it. The other hand, you've got to talk to investors. We've got this cool thing that we're doing, one of the reasons we're here this week, looking at stock screeners and hot stocks. Do you feel like investors have on a larger scale sort of rediscovered, biotech stocks like yours? It feels like there's a, finally, been ignored for a couple years,

but now back to life. Yeah, I think Sotom connects is a great example of just that. So the pendulum swings back and forth. You know that. And in this case, science and innovation carry the day for ultimately medicines for patients. We're focused to heart disease. Heart disease is the number one killer of Americans, the number one reason why people are hospitalized, especially an increasingly aging demographic. Our pipeline, our portfolio of potential medicines directed to those diseases, we're in a good position to build an enduring business starting with this first potential medicine. Can you just give us a credit? By the way, if I have to cut you off, Robert, we've got Jensen Wong and Alex Karp kind of, I'm sure you've heard of AI. I don't know if that's, by the way, does AI,

We're going to wrap right there. Okay. I thought it was a good interview. Robert from C. of cytokinetics. Welcome to live TV, by the way. Oh, good. That was a good interview.

Appreciate you coming in. Thank you very much. We shall now go to Washington, D.C., in the aforementioned, Jensen Wong, Alex Karp, and Christina Ports and Elvis. And I'm just going to piggyback off of that conversation, Brian. We're talking about AI and an important collaboration

between Palantir and Invidia, the fact that they're joining forces, not to just analyze data, but actually to provide business decisions. And Alex, I'm actually going to start with you, the CEO of Palantir, just to explain, does that mean no human intervention? Can you just explain how this would work and use Lowe's as an example? Well, first of all, I'm delighted to be on the stage with what many people, I believe,

to be one of the great entrepreneurs of my lifetime and a patriot. And it means a lot to me to be here. So we have a product called Ontology. You could think of it as essentially a digital representative of your enterprise, including security model, which essentially takes the disabilities that have large language models and allows you to move decision-making to the front line with people, without people, depending on how you're doing it. In the context of Loves and other enterprises, it allows you to essentially automate decision-making,

like how would your supply chain work? How would it work if it changed? How do you get the cheapest good to the right place? given that there may be disruption. But in general, what's very, very special, I believe, about our partnership is we're going to be able to move 2x, and I think in the future even faster. So you get a much, much faster. And actually, because you can control it in a more granular way, much faster, much cheaper. And then the macro thing that I'm actually most decided about, which for our country is, because of that, you can do manufacturing in America, you can make the

worker stronger and better. And you have more competition because you can use open weight models, open source models. You can use any hyperscaler. You can decide not to use a hyperscaler. This is much, much better for America, much better for workers, much better for industry. It's cheaper, it's faster. And obviously, they have one of the world's top tech teams, and we work very well with them. So Jensen, just in regards to that collaboration, then who would actually be procuring the hardware? Is this like a company like Lowe's? Do they have to put the upfront cost with their existing GPUs and then working with Palantir? Is that how it works?

First of all, it's amazing to think that the Pallenteer ontology platform has achieved all of this. And they're the fastest enterprise growing platform in the world. In a lot of ways, it gives enterprises what we all want, which is intelligence and the ability to make good decisions fast. And now we're going to supercharge it with NVIDIA's accelerated computing for the first time. And so NVIDIA's Kuda accelerated computing is going to get integrated. We're going to be able to put NVIDIA's AI libraries on top of that and open source model that we're working on together into the ontology platform. And you'll run it in the cloud, any cloud, or you run it on-prem or even a private cloud. And so, as you know, Nvidia runs everywhere.

And so you could buy a server from HP or Dell. You could be in another country and you want to set up your own private cloud. We got no trouble with that. And so it doesn't matter. We run everywhere. And Pallenture runs everywhere. But you're talking about the future then. So this isn't something that would be accretive to revenues just in the near term.

You're still working it out. And like I know Lowe's is an example, but are there other customers? Well, at Pallantier, we just do what's best for our customers. We work downstream for value creation. So we believe we know when it's faster, better, more accurate, and more flexible, and creates a better future for them because they can choose how they want to run their applications. We'll do very well. And at Pallantier, we're doing very well on revenue and profit.

And we're, you know, that's not actually our primary motivation now. And the reason we've done so well on profit and on growth is because you just have to create value. This creates more value for the end user. But you just said before, too, that the human may not even be involved with some of these decisions. And I guess that is a major concern in this day and age that AI efficiencies could take away from or displace the job force. So couldn't something like this collaboration do that? You know, it's interesting. When you say humans don't have to be in the loop, that doesn't inherently mean there are cases where humans need to be in loop.

For example, 40 years ago, we had 40x that we had 40, we had 40, with 40x more manufacturing jobs than we have now. So it's like you can make more manufacturing jobs, which are humans, working class humans. You can build things you couldn't build in the past. And those humans become more and more valuable than they were in the past. In the defense context, you have situations where humans have to be in the loop offense, situations where humans shouldn't be in the loop like defense. Our collaboration makes all those use cases better. for workers, for manufacturing, for defense, for offense, and in general, because it allows people to use any kind of model,

any kind of compute structure, it makes America stronger and better. Whenever a business is more productive, whenever they can move faster, their business grows, they hire more people. And so I think this idea that AI is going to take jobs is going to change everyone's job. That's for sure. But I think it's going to make companies more productive. We're more productive today because of AI. We're hiring more people.

And we saw some leaders of smaller companies, startups, that have been around for just three years, valuations of $39 billion, 400 employees, and clearly that is a beneficiary of using AI. But I wonder, with your proximity to the White House right now, you're here quite often. Is that a concern that you're hearing from them? What about the workers?

We have to make sure that we're not displacing them. And is there anything that you guys are in particular is doing with the White House? Look at what President Trump is doing. The first thing here, my first phone call, my first meeting with them, it's manufacturing in America. Move manufacturing back to the United States. It creates tons of jobs. If we could move manufacturing the core technology, we have better security, national security,

we have create more jobs. Second, because we're talking about the AI industrial revolution, all of these AI factories creates a ton of jobs. And so we're, really, he's really in the job creation mode, bringing manufacturing back to United States. AI is exceedingly good for working-class workers. Now, you could argue is it good for consultants and people, that's a very different debate, but you're going to see remanufacturing.

How would you build a culturally specific enterprise, like we power, Panasonic batteries? It's like you are building something that otherwise would have had to be built in Japan. Now you can build it in America. You can have trained the workers so that they can behave like Japanese engineers. That's all AI augmentation. And by the way, the workers are more valuable, and just like us, they get paid. because they're more valuable.

Everybody knows how to use an AI because AI smart. And so AI is the first technology that has closed the technology divide. Everybody who didn't know how to program computers in the past, they know exactly how to program a computer now. It's called AI. But for the workforce in general trying to learn all of that, it does take time. So do you think that maybe we're overestimating the benefits of this AI build out in the near term, which is reflected in markets?

Let me, sorry. Here, so you go. I'm going to push back on this narrative. of all, AI makes America the dominant country in the world. So just start there. Every other country in the world, like I spent half my life in Europe, they're whining and crying. It's like, we have the right chips, we have the right software, we have the right engineers, we have the right culture, we have the right people. The risk appetite. Risk appetite, right people to ask questions. The whole thing is combining to become a juggernaut. And then, and like, then you, these partnerships

happen and that just throws gasoline on the fire. So the classic, the real question is, will the GDP growth accrue to all Americans or just wealthy Americans. And the answer to that is it depends what you do. But I deeply believe, I think we deeply believe. Well, no, manufacturing jobs. If you build manufacturing jobs, which is what this president wants to do, can you build them? Yes. How do you build them? You need AI. Can you train the people? Can you upscale them? Yes, if you use AI. Mechanicals, electricals, and plumbers and construction. And I know the red tape, you've discussed it, but nuclear reactors building that. The number one thing of this administration is pro, power growth. Look at all the power generations that he's approved. Look at all the DOE land and energy

they've approved. I mean, this is really about this is a pro energy growth administration, pro manufacturing administration, and President Trump is pro jobs. When these things all come together, yeah, it's going to be fantastic. Is that why you said make America great again? That's the first time I've heard you say to that at the end of a speech for GTC. Well, I was thinking everybody in the room. I mean, you know, look. But was that also a communication to the president? because you were expecting him here, right? No, he's in Asia. I'm supposed to be here.

I thought you had said on an earlier panel that you were expecting. I just, I think we're making America great again. I think all of the, all of his policies relating to energy and manufacturing and all of his, all of his enthusiasm behind artificial intelligence and making sure that that American AI technology is the standard of the world, that it's, is diffused maximally and making sure that The rest of the world has the benefit of American technology so they can build on top of it. All of that is fantastic. And Alex, do you feel like any outcomes for the end of this week?

I know, I know you're heading, you know, Asia right after this. Do you feel like there could be a more positive outcome from the trade talks? Because it seems like the market's perceiving that. All of the CEOs I've spoken to at this event, too, are very, very bullish that there might be some good news. So maybe you guys both know something that we don't that you can share. And we're going to tell you. Yes, right now on TV or not. Look, look, I don't want to just make this about our.

partnership, but if you already have a dominant position, a profitable position, a position that is growing in both cases in a kind of way that is not what people have seen in the past, and you somehow create more value for your customers. That is incredible for our customers. It's incredible for our country, and it's not so bad for us. And Palantir is the most technically deep enterprise platform company in the world. And this collaboration is just going to supercharge that. And I will end it, but I just want, I did ask about China. So is there any way that is, do you believe that you're going to be getting grants for licenses? Well, you know, I think the, the important thing to take away is that, that we need to win developers all over the

world. And there are so many open source developers in China. I think it's a mistake not to have them build on American tech. So that's number one. Number two, we all agree that, that we want America to win. What's our strategy in doing so? And one of the best frameworks that I've heard is David Sacks talking about, imagine five years from now. Where do we want, suppose American technology was around the world, where do we want American technology market share to be?

Do you want it to be 80% or you want it to be 20%. And he believes, as I believe, that we want the world to be built on American tech standards. We want the same thing that happened in the good old days good old days when we first started wireless technology and it's no longer built on American standards. And we really want to go back to those days and AI is ours to lose. Just as Alex was talking about earlier, we have the chips, we have the infrastructure, we have the technology, we have the models, we have the people. This is ours. And we will have the power. This is ours to lose.

And we just got to get on top of it and make it happen. And you believe that that is going to happen. The tides are changing and the relationships with other countries are working out quite well, including China. And so is that something that you're telling me right now? That's something that only the president could solve. And if there's anybody who would solve it, I'm certain the president will be the one to do it. We're just building technology.

Yeah. We're building technology. We want to be in the strongest position we can be in. And we're repped by a president who seems to be extraordinarily good at figuring out and make deals. You saw the peace treaty in the Middle East, which I don't think anyone else could have done. You've seen it, in my humble opinion, you see what happened. reactions abroad, including his sanctioning of our response to Iran.

And we're in the factory building the best tools in the world, and that should give everyone an advantage. And the important thing is China is out of Nvidia's forecast. If anything happens, it's zero, right? It's zero. And if the president pulls out a miracle, and it'll just be a bonus for the country. And a bonus for a lot of investors who are very excited about how your share prices, both done, both of you.

And I'd like to end on that positive note. Thank you guys for joining us, and we thank you. Brian, back over to you and CNBC. Christina Ports, Inevales, with Jensen Wong and Palantir's Alex Karp out in Washington, D.C. Number of headlines being made there. In fact, you heard Jensen Wong say not only make America great again, but he talked about we had the most pro-growth energy White House in a while. He talked about NVIDIA still hiring. And I think the line of the interview was Jensen Wong referring to the, quote, AI Industrial Revolution,

leading to a lot of jobs. That was kind of a very pro-growth, pro-A-I, pro-job, pro-America conversation. All right, joining us now on set to talk about some other news, AI-related. We've got Amazon, we've got some OpenAI, Microsoft News as well. McKenzie Sigalos, McKenzie. We'll get to the Amazon stuff,

get to the Open AI stuff, because they made some comments about energy as well. But as somebody who covers this stuff every single day, anything you heard that sort of takes us into a new track, or is it stuff we've heard about Nvidia's business prospects prior? I feel like this is the latest example of Nvidia leading into this tech conglomerate playbook. Think about some of the investments they've made lately, $100 billion into Open AI over the next few years.

They're investing $5 billion into their rival Intel, but also taking a half a billion dollar stake in a self-driverless car startup. I mean, they're just really expanding the scope of what their business model is. And with NVIDIA, they've now got new rivals in the chip business. Google has their TPU, their in-house silicone. Amazon's trying to build a rival as well. When I woke up this morning and turned on CNBC and watched Jim and David and others talking on Squawk on the street, I saw Lisa Sue of advanced microdevices, right?

And I knew that Jensen was giving a speech today at the NVIDIA Developers Conference or GPU conference in D.C. And I thought, this is not just an AI arms race. It's a PR arms race. It's a money race, right? All these companies in many ways are competing for the same investor dollar, I think. Yes or no? I mean, they're all looking to capture part of that OpenAI Halo.

You mentioned AMD and Nvidia and Broadcom. Think about the kind of price surges we've seen in the public markets off the back of a single announcement about a relationship with OpenAI that's forming, whether that's an equity stake or a commitment to build new compute. Yeah, I mean, we had one. with Nokia today. Invidia takes a stake in Nokia. We haven't talked about Nokia in years, and the stock is absolutely rocketing higher. At pretty much at the same time this occurred, Sam Altman of Open AI, I guess he's probably the most powerful man in technology in America, if it's not Jensen Wong, was making comments about building out the power base, something we talked about with Interior

Secretary Bergam moments ago. I know you were here. You were sort of monitoring that. What did Sam Altman say? So we had this live stream, and it was off the back of the news that they've finalized terms of their commercial agreement with Microsoft, but the conversation veered towards his infrastructure ambitions, and he said two very interesting things. So one, we've got, they've committed to 33 gigawatts of compute. And the best way to think about that is each gigawatt is what the equivalent of one nuclear reactor that it would take to power it, or 750,000 homes. And what he said is that the industry standard today is $50 billion roughly to build out a gigawatt of compute. He wants to get it down to $2,000.

20 billion. That is an ambitious... I want a unicorn and a pony. I'm not sure it's going to happen. Sam Altman, to me, it's... And you don't have to comment on this. You know, he's making comments about energy, which are great. He recognizes the demand for energy, which is great. But is anybody pushing back on this and saying, well, is this possible?

Because that's not something that's necessarily in his control. All do respect to Sam Altman. He doesn't build nuclear power plants, at least not yet. He's getting into the business of building chips with Broadcom. They signed a $10 billion deal there. He's diversifying his chip exposure with AMD with Nvidia. We'll see if they ultimately decide to sign with AWS, but he's controlling what he can control.

And so he's also had this open call to infrastructure providers across North America. 800 bids have come in to offer him a mix of power sources to make this reality. Did you say ultimately or ultimately? Because I feel like it's Sam Alt. It might be Sam Ultimately, we're going to do this. We'll see if he can actually now control energy very quickly. Open AI had a restructuring. It involves Microsoft. I'm not going to pretend to understand what the story is. What's the story? To me, it's a win for Microsoft. So we finalized terms of both their

commercial agreement and then also Microsoft's equity stake. That's 27 percent, largest single shareholder in the company. Think about the return that Microsoft has. Its stake is worth $135 billion. They invested $13 billion into Open AI. That's a pretty impressive return over that space of time. They retain a lot of IP rights and that 20 percent revenue share. So a lot of wins for Microsoft here. Okay, a lot of stuff there. We appreciate you also rolling with the headlines coming off the NVIDIA and Palantir interview as well, McKenzie Seagalos. Thank you very much. She was going to talk about Amazon. They had some layoff announcements today. So did UPS. Stocks up. Stocks up the story. That's next. All right, welcome back. Shares of UPS rising today. The company beat

earnings expectations. Stocks up 8%. But there's a lot more to the story involves some human beings and some pink slips. Frank Holland, working a long day. joining us now, Frank. What is the big story, the real story on UPS? All right, well, Brian, the real story here is 48,000 jobs reduced from UPS's workforce. Back in April, they said they were targeting 20,000. Obviously, this is a significant amount more. But it comes in two different buckets, 14,000 corporate jobs and 34,000 operational roles. But the reasons behind both of those workforce reductions, well, they're very similar. One is the phasing out of the Amazon business. Number two is the company returning its lower cost shipping option,

back to the post office. It's called Shorepost. They had brought it in-house and it ended up incurring some additional costs, more costs than they originally thought. Now they're sending it back to the post office. Either way, lower value means lower, less need for workers. Yeah, and, you know, you hate to see a stock go up necessarily when there's a lot of layoffs announced with, but I guess, Frank, this goes to their cost structure, right? I mean, UPS, challenging environment, right? And and they've got to do something with the higher cost. I assume this is that move. Right. The company's been in cost-cutting move for quite a while, reducing facilities.

One of the reasons for the beat was the fact they did a sale leaseback of a number of facilities. So a little bit of engineering there, according to some analysts I spoke to. But the real question for UPS is, what's the holiday season going to look like? The holiday peak, that's the quarter that we're in right now. They offered some very optimistic guidance for the holiday season at the same time. We continue to see layoffs in a number of different areas and a lot of concerns about the consumer. Remember, we often talk about the consumer as a monolith, but it's not. It's bifurcated. There's high-end consumers that do about 50% of the spending, and then there's the rest of us.

UPS, they need consumers through every part of the spectrum to be shipping packages and sending out those holiday presents for their holiday quarter to meet their expectations. Frank Holland on UPS, stock up 8%. Tough day for a lot of workers there. Stock is up. Frank, we really appreciate that. Thank you. Take a short break, and then we're back with more. CNBC Live from San Francisco right after. We're in San Francisco, so let's talk to somebody that actually lives here. CBC's restaurant and small business correspondent, Kate Rogers, Kate Mizzouho, saying they love some restaurant stocks. What are they? Okay, so Domino's, Wingstop, and Dutch Bros.

Writing it down, taking notes here. I am, actually. I love that. So, interesting note here, they're talking about positioning in this ongoing value war, and they think that pizza players are better positioned than some of the fast food names. Again, naming Domino's as a top pick, which is really interesting. interesting. I spoke to Domino's CEO Russell Weiner last quarter, and he's like, we're valuing, or discounting rather, the thing that you actually go to Domino's for, which is the center

of the plate item, the pizza, right? And when you're looking at some of these value offerings from the fast food companies, they may not be offering you. He argues value on the one thing that you might actually want. Went to a Dutch pros in Sacramento. It's about 20 cars in line. How hot is Dutch pros? So hot. It's one of the very few positive names in the sector year to date. It's up, I think about 14% and they actually value bros over Starbucks. They say Starbucks is too pricey and so Bros is their pick on that one. I love the Retro Cup too. Kate Rogers, that was about as fast as going through a Dutch pro's drive-thru.

Kate Rogers, San Francisco, folks. Thanks for watching. Fed Day tomorrow.