Prof G Markets - Nvidia’s Record $46.7B Quarter, Trump’s 50% Tariff on India & Can Tax Credits Bring Hollywood Back?

Episode Date: August 28, 2025

Ed is joined by Gil Luria, Head of Technology Research at D.A. Davidson, to discuss Nvidia’s second quarter earnings and why the stock fell following the report. Then Ed takes a look at the new punitive tariffs Trump is imposing on India, and finally, he unpacks California’s new tax credits and whether they will help bring production back to Los Angeles.  Check out our latest Prof G Markets newsletter Order "The Algebra of Wealth" out now Subscribe to No Mercy / No Malice Follow Prof G Markets on Instagram Follow Ed on Instagram and X Follow Scott on Instagram Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

When you're with Amex Platinum, you get access to exclusive dining experiences and an annual travel credit. So the best tapas in town might be in a new town altogether. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at Amex.ca. This winter, take a trip to Tampa on Porter Airlines. Enjoy the warm Tampa Bay temperatures and warm Porter hospitality on your way there.

All Porter fairs include beer, wine, and snacks, and free fast-streaming Wi-Fi on planes with no middle seats. And your Tampa Bay vacation includes good times, relaxation, and great Gulf Coast weather. Visit Flyporter.com and day. actually enjoy economy. Today's number, 117 billion. That's how many people have ever existed on planet Earth, or, as Peter Thiel would put it, way too many people. Welcome to Profite Markets, Matt. I'm Ed Elson. It is awful, then that building is hell. Welcome to Proffty Markets. I'm Ed Elson. It is all. August 28th, let's check in on yesterday's market vitals. The three major indices rose throughout

the day. Ahead of NVIDIA's earnings, we will get to that in a second. The S&P closed at a fresh record. Short-term treasury yields extended their decline as bets on rate cuts strengthened. And finally, crude prices climbed after the US slapped punitive tariffs on India for purchasing Russian oil. More on that later. Okay, what's happening? The world's most valuable company reported second quarter earnings that beat expectations on the top and bottom lines and set a fresh record for sales. NVIDIA's overall revenue rose 56% to $46.7 billion. Net income was up 59%.

Data center revenue also rose 56% from a year ago, but that was slightly below what analysts were expecting. as we know on this show, sky high expectations are often Nvidia's downfall, and the stock did indeed fall as much as 4% in after-hours trading on that narrow miss. We'll see how it trades throughout the day. So, joining us now to break down these earnings, we have Gil Luria, head of technology research at D.A. Davidson. Gil, great to have you on the podcast. Thank you for joining me. Thanks for having me.

So let's get into these Nvidia earnings. Biggest day of the year, biggest day of the quarter, I should say. Just look at this revenue here, $46.7 billion, up 56%. $41.1 billion in data center revenue up 56%. 26.4 billion in net income. Remember, this is all on a quarterly basis, up. 59% and yet the stock fell in after hours. Make that make sense to me. Yeah, so first happy Nvidia Day. It is the biggest day of the quarter. The guidance of

$54 billion was slightly less than expected because some investors, some estimates had included China revenue in their forecast when the company made it clear that this revenue forecast, this estimate does not include at least any H20 sales. And so that number looks a little light. But again, considering they said if we can sell H20s, if we get the licenses and the customers and the government tells us how much taxes we have to pay, we could actually do $2 to $5 billion more. So in that sense, it's a fine forecast, again, slightly less than the higher expectations,

but it's an okay forecast. So this H20 China debacle, and we should probably clarify what that means. So this H20 chip, which was designed for China, that was basically Nvidia's China chip. That was supposed to be sold to China, and then Trump comes in and says, no, you're not allowed to sell that to China anymore. Then he reverses that decision and says, you can sell it, but you've got to pay 15% to the government. and now I'm hearing that they're not allowed to sell those H20 chips anymore, or they're discontinuing that. There's a lot of confusion here with this H20 China situation.

What is going on there, and how important is it to NVIDIA? Yeah, the Chinese market probably represents a quarter of the global market, something along those lines, probably a quarter of NVIDIA's revenues in total. They report slightly less, but there's some indirect sales into China. And H20 is the chip they were able to sell. It's a degraded chip that they were able to sell into China for a while. And then at some point, the government around April told them, no, you can't sell it into China.

Then Jensen Wong went to the White House, and the president told them he can sell it into China. So you brought us mostly up to speed on the plot. There's another part of the plot, which is, this is, again, a national security issue. NVIDIA, the government believes and has some convicted felons that have smuggled NVIDIA servers into China and therefore asked NVIDIA to start tracking servers so they don't get sold into China by their resellers. Hopefully you're keeping it.

We're still on. And this is the U.S. government saying it. Okay. The U.S. government asked NVIDIA to put trackers on their chips so nobody can smuggle the most advanced chips into China. China felt strongly that that's offensive to them. They don't want trackers in any of the servers. They feel like that's us having a backdoor into their compute

and therefore told some of its entities not to buy H-20s. And here we are today. The U.S. is allowing Nvidia to sell H-20s. It will charge them a 15% tax to do so, but China has frozen those sales because it feels like those trackers represent backdoor into their data centers. So the U.S. and China have to figure this out.

Jensen Wang is shuttling between to try to reconcile those differences. And for now, the Nvidia can sell X20 chips not into China, which it did in the July quarter, but isn't selling into China yet. Hopefully that all makes sense. It does all make sense.

it's certainly confusing, but all of that is determining what you just described is a quarter of the business. I've seen other estimates. I've seen, you know, I think I've seen lower numbers than that. Sounds like maybe there is some murkiness on how big the China market actually is for NVIDIA, but be that as it may, we're describing a lot of money here. And that's a lot of confusion that determines a lot of money. So did this earnings call clarify anything about China? Did we learn if the H20 chips are going to be sold? Is that included in the guidance? Did they remove it from the guidance? I've heard that they're working on a new chip that might work for China. Did Jensen clarify anything for us on this call?

What we heard is that there were no sales of H20 chips to China in the July quarter. There were sales of H20 chips not into China in the July quarter. For the August quarter, they said we're not including any sales of H20 chips into China for this quarter, the October quarter. So our forecast, our guidance of $54 billion plus or minus 2% does not include any H20s sailed into China, although we believe we may be able to sale H20s into China in the quarter, as much as $2 to $5 billion. That's where we're at. On a parallel path, we are now trying to convert.

Remember, H-20, that's Hopper chips. That's two years ago. All this. Now we're working on Blackwell chips, right? The current generation is, in fact, is Blackwell Ultra. So, Nvidia is working on degrading Blackwell chips to a point where they can sell those into China,

but the government hasn't even made it clear to them. The U.S. government hasn't made it clear to them how far they need to degrade it in order to get those approved. So that's a parallel path that probably isn't relevant for October quarter, but is relevant for the January quarter as we look ahead into what is pretty a good high expectation for the January quarter as well. So that's what we heard. That's how far we've gotten in terms of the commentary.

The company didn't give that much more detail on the call, but we know all those things. Were you surprised it all by the market's reaction? We'll see how it trades throughout the day. Maybe it'll rip back up throughout the day. But, you know, falling as much as 4% after hours, that's pretty significant. I'm wondering if you are surprised by that move at all. Do you think that that's warranted? Not surprised at all. The stock has been up very considerably this year, and especially since those lows in that April-May time frame. And, right, and again, expectations walking in where they would be able to guide to more of $55 billion, maybe $55.5 billion for the next quarter. So the fact they guide the 54 plus some option on China, it was a little less than expected. So it makes sense for the stock to pull back a little bit. Yeah. Stepping back, the valuation is reasonable. It's at the same

level that it's been in the past when the company was growing 20, 25%, which is probably what we're looking at for next year. So the fact that it was a full evaluation didn't guide quite as high investors expected, that explains the pullback. Yes. It seems as if the market basically is looking for any reason to bring it down. I mean, they are scrutinizing these earnings, and anything that even seems remotely shaky is an excuse to bring it down just a little bit. But having said that, we are at, what are we at? 4.4 trillion dollars, the most valuable company in history, the first company to hit a $4 trillion market cap. And as you say, not a crazy valuation, given the growth and given the financials that we're

seeing. What are the macro concerns, though, for NVIDIA? When we see these little dips. If we had to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who decided to sell after they saw those earnings, what are some of the reasons that people might be pulling back from NVIDIA? What are the major concerns about this stock? Yeah, so we've talked about China at length. That's going to add a lot of variability. But the bigger concern is that there will be other bottlenecks that limit NVIDIA's ability to grow, meaning a chip can only go into data center when the data center is built, hooked up to electricity, and has its HVAC installed. We are having a harder and harder time, especially in the U.S., finding spots that we can build

next to an electricity output, sufficient electricity output, and then we're having a difficulty building those data centers and installing HVAC because that requires a lot of people that have been very busy for the last two years. So the only thing that could really slow down in video outside of China is if we are not able to build the warm data centers fast enough to put those chips in. The other set of concerns has to do with the progress of AI,

which is models have made remarkable progress in the last two years, in the last year, in the last six months, and they've gotten so capable that we are all using them a lot more, And we're using them to an extent that inference demand is growing very rapidly, which is driving the data center demand, which is driving hyperscalers to buy more chips, which is driving other companies now that are not hyperscalers to buy more chips.

As long as the model continue to be helpful to us, that will continue. But if at any point it hits a wall and consumers stop using and adopting the models for their everyday use and trying to use them at work, if that was ever to slow down, we could see a slowdown in demand. Having said that, as we sit here today, that doesn't look to be the case anytime soon. We are all using AI models

for more and more of our personal lives and increasingly our professional lives. So that demand looks to grow, but that would be the other place where the NVIDIA story could get derailed. Yeah, definitely, we're definitely scraping the barrel there for concerns. but it's helpful to know that.

We appreciate your time, Gil. Happy Nvidia day to you. And I will just say, we love having you on because you somehow make chips and graphics processing units not boring. And also simple to understand, to an extent. So we really appreciate your time. Thank you.

That was Gil Luria, head of technology research at D.A. Davidson. Media stock initially fell, but we will, of course, be watching this. throughout the day, we'll see what happens. After the break, Trump escalates trade tensions with India. And if you're enjoying the show so far, give proffty markets a follow wherever you get your podcasts. Support for the show comes from Found. Does it ever feel like managing your business finances is a full-time job on top of your actual full-time job? Enter Found. Found is a business-making

platform that lets you effortlessly track expenses and manage invoices. You can even set aside money for different business goals and control spending with different virtual cards. And found doesn't just consolidate your financial ecosystem. They can also automate manual activities including finding tax write-offs. And the best part, no hidden fees. That means no account maintenance fees, no minimum balance, and it's free to sign up. And by the way, other small businesses are loving found too. This found user said, open quote, found is going to save me so much headache. It makes everything so much easier, expenses, income, profits, taxes, invoices even, close quote. And Found has 30,000 five-star reviews just like this. You can open a found account for free

at F-O-U-N-D.com slash Prop G. Found is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by Permanent Bank, member FDIC. Don't put this one off, join thousands of small business owners who have streamlined their finances with Found. This week on Criminal, in 2019, E. Jean Carroll published an essay called Hidious Men. In it, she said that President Donald Trump had sexually assaulted her in her Bergdorf-Gudman dressing room in the 1990s. Donald Trump told her reporter that it didn't happen and that, quote, she's not my type. You knew he would react, though.

I thought he would say it was consensual. This summer, I went to visit E. Jean Carroll at her house in the woods. We spoke about what her life has been like since she wrote that essay and what it was like to sue Donald Trump twice. You can hear my conversation with E. Jean Carroll on the latest episode of Criminal. Listen wherever you get your podcasts. This week on Net Worth and Chill, you sent in your messiest money dilemmas, and I'm here to deliver the verdicts.

From the couple stuck in a mortgage with their brothers, law to the wedding and bachelorette parties costing an arm and a leg, we're unpacking the most cringeworthy cash conflicts that are testing relationships and moral boundaries. Whether your team justified financial boundaries or team, that's just cold. This episode will have you questioning everything you thought you knew about money etiquette. I am honestly quite speechless at this story. Not only are you not the financial a-hole. It sounds like this guy was an actual sociopath, like a terrible, terrible person. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on YouTube.com slash your rich BFF.

We're back with Profi Markets. The U.S. has officially doubled tariffs on India imports up to 50%, one of the sharpest trade escalations in recent history. The White House says that the move is designed to punish India for buying Russian oil. They are concerned about what those oil purchases are doing to aid Russia in their war on Ukraine. So it's not just an economic move. It is really a geopolitical move. But make no mistake, this will be economically very painful for India. America is India's largest trading partner. We buy $87 billion worth of goods from India per year. That is more than a third of India's total exports. And so according to estimates, you slap on an extra 25% tariff on top of the 25% that we already had in place, remember, for India.

And you are looking at erasing a full percentage point of GDP growth for the Indian economy. You are also likely putting 2 million jobs at risk in India. So this is a big deal. Maybe not as much of a big deal for America, but certainly for India. And it's also a big deal in terms of our relationship with India, which we have worked very hard on throughout history, and now it appears we are essentially leaving it behind, or at the very least, damaging it. But let's get an expert on to break this down for us. Our producer Claire spoke with Raymond Vickery, who is really the perfect person to tell us

what this all means. Raymond is a former member of the Clinton administration. He was the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Trade Development. He focused specifically on India when he was in the administration, and he is now a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. I think that this is a huge mistake on the part of the Trump administration. You know, for the past 30 years, we've worked very, very hard to overcome the estrangement which had existed between these two largest democracies in the world. And with one stroke, much of what we have done has been thrown into doubt and to disarray. So this is a very unfortunate development, not only from an economic, but from a strategic

point of view. These two democracies have made progress both in terms of economic engagement and strategic engagement based on trust. And this approach of putting really the high tariff rate from the U.S. in the world on India, a supposed partner in so many areas, is extremely difficult for us to rectify in a short run and is completely the wrong approach. You called it an estrangement. Could you give us some more historical context on our trade relationship with India and where that estrangement came from? Basically, you can put U.S. India relations into three large baskets. One was the time of independence from 47 to the late 60s, if you will, when India had very

really limited economic and strategic relations with the U.S. because of the U.S. because of the they were coming out of a colonial period and had such a rampant poverty. About the late 60s, early 70s, the relationship got worse because there was a feeling that India had sided with the Soviet Union in the Cold War. In the early 1990s, the U.S. and India entered a period of... of reconciliation. India had almost gone broke because, really, of its top-down, license-rige socialist approach to the economy. The collapse of the Soviet Union deprived it of cheap arms and some of the trade which had occurred there,

as well as strategically. So India was in need of new partners. It opened up to the West, former colonial powers, and to the United States. And even under Trump won, the first administration, that process basically continued. We had a very good Republican ambassador, Ken Jester, to India, and it went forward. The Biden administration was all in, and there was progress not only on the high-tech side, but just in ordinary trade matters, the movement of people under H-1B visas, the trade in information technology-assisted services flourished. And now what has happened, of course, is all that has been thrown into reverse. There is no justification for the first 25% that was announced, and then, of course, exacerbated by this sledgehammer approach to India on oil for Russia.

It is true that India should do more in regard to world peace, whether it be the invasion of Ukraine or indeed what happens with China. taking this sledgehammer approach, particularly when you don't do the same thing with the leading oil buyer China, you don't really put pressure on Western Europe in regard to natural gas is deemed by the Indians, of course, gross hypocrisy, and is counterproductive to what the United States should be trying to achieve, which is a closer relationship between the U.S. India, whether it be having to do with the Russian invasion of Ukraine or terrorism from Pakistan, so many areas. It's thrown it all into reverse and is quite detrimental to the relationship. As you mentioned there, it's many analysts are saying that Trump,

is really just using this punitive tariff as a way to get to Putin. And I guess my question would be, as you said, he's not doing the same to China. So why do you think Trump has chosen India as this means of punishing Russia? Well, I hate to say it, but I don't really think it's about Russia so much as it is about President Trump and his egotomania as being the, center of not only national, but world decision-making. I think the Indians infuriated President Trump, when he claimed to have solved hostilities between Pakistan and India, which were a reaction to terrorist attack up in Kashmir, India refused to give him credit for bringing about any kind of peace. On the other hand, with Pakistan, the Pakistan authorities said, yes, President Trump

had caused cessation of hostilities and restoration of relatively peaceful relations, and even nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize. So President Trump, I don't think, took that kindly. Could we see India retaliate with tariffs on the U.S.? Or does India risk too much by escalating? Well, I think India is going to have its tendencies toward protectionism exacerbated. For years and years, we've tried to,

bring India into a world trading system, which recognizes the advantages of having goods and services move across national borders. This was not the orientation of India to start with, with Nehru and the whole Swadeshi, which means self-reliance movement, has been a very very, strong element of Indian politics from the very first. And so what this does is play right into that protectionist view. And it gives domestic political strength to those who say, yeah, we told you so. India can't rely on anybody but itself. And those people who will sell it whatever it wants without any restrictions on the arms side. That's one of the very bad consequences of this. When you look at the economic consequence, I'm seeing forecasts that if these tariffs hold, it could knock off a percentage of GDP for India. Do you think that that is a fair

assessment and really just what does that say about how important America is to India's economy? Yes, I think that it is significant. And when you're talking about 1.4 billion people and you knock off a percentage even in growth, you're affecting vast numbers of people. And you're affecting people really in areas which are most important. to the United States, cooperation in regard to manufacturing, into supply chains, into parts, those things for automobiles and trucks, those are the things which get hurt even more rather than, if you will, the agricultural economy, which sustain so many people. So it's very significant, and it's a lot more significant to India than it is to the United States.

And that's one of the reasons I think that President Trump and his advisors, Peter Navarro, and so forth, are picking on India because India is a relatively soft target as opposed to China. and so the approach of the transactional, you know, make a very large demand to create chaos and fear works better with India than it does with China and does others. So I think that's an aspect of it. But it's serious. It's a great point. I'm glad you made it. Thank you so much for doing this, Raymond.

I really appreciate your time. Okay. Thank you for having me. That was Raymond Vickery, senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. So several months ago, Scott and I discussed what the net effect of this tariff policy would be. And our conclusion was that we would see a lot of deals, a lot of deals would get done. They just wouldn't really involve us. We're basically sending every other nation into each other's arms.

We are rerouting all of these trade partnerships, throughout the world, reestablishing these geopolitical alliances for everyone else, but not for us. And it does appear that that is exactly what is happening here with India. It appears that that is what is happening with the fastest growing economy in the world. They're getting cozy with everyone else. They're getting cozy with Russia. Modi is chatting with Putin. He's just called Putin his friend. And they've now agreed to up their trade by 50 percent. to a hundred billion dollars. He's been on this bricks tour. Last month, he was hanging out in Brazil. He was also hanging out with the president of South Africa. And what is on

Prime Minister Modi's agenda for next week, he's off to visit Xi Jinping in China. So yes, Beijing and New Delhi, China and India, they are now patching up their relationship. It's new as of this year. And by the way, this visit to China that is going to happen next week, that will be Prime Minister Modi's first visit to China in seven years. So, yeah, deals are happening. They're just not involving us. You might remember a few months ago when California approved a $750 million tax subsidy to support Hollywood. This was all part of the film and television tax credit program. It was essentially designed to bring Hollywood back to life.

Well, we have an update. As of yesterday morning, according to the California state government, 22 new TV shows have been approved for production in the state of California, and those shows will benefit from the tax breaks. According to the California state press release, the expansion of the program is, quote, historic, and it will generate roughly $1 billion in wages and spending across the Golden State. Applications for subsidies have risen 400% from last year,

and all eligible shows were approved. So, Hollywood is back, or at least it's back, according to the state of California. 22 new TV shows, a billion dollars in spending across the state, six and a half thousand jobs. It sounds pretty good. Maybe this isn't the end of Hollywood, but as we like to do at Prof G, let's just put those numbers into perspective for a moment. So you've got 22 new TV shows. Sounds good. And then you compare it to the 1,200 TV shows that were produced in America in 2024. Okay, you've got 6.5,000 new jobs, which sounds like a big deal.

Okay, until you realize that the amount of jobs that L.A. is losing, it's been roughly 18,000 in just the past two years alone. So, you know, production isn't really back here. They're basically just clawing back a third of the losses that have happened over the past two years. And then you have that $1 billion number, which the press release appears very proud of. Again, maybe it sounds good, a billion dollars. But then you just compare it to how much. is being spent and made, not in the Hollywood economy, but in the digital economy, in the world

of TikTok and Instagram and YouTube. In fact, $1 billion is only a little bit more than the amount of money Mr. Beast is projected to spend on his YouTube videos in 2025. It's also the amount that Netflix spends on content every three weeks. So meanwhile, in addition to what digital media is doing to Hollywood. It's doing a number on it. You've also got this international competition that's happening too. It costs $53,000 to hire one grip in Los Angeles, California. In Budapest, Hungary, you can hire six grips for 51,000. And by the way, that is why Netflix now spends the majority of its content budget abroad. It's also why America has dropped to number four in the world rankings for film and TV production activity.

So, you know, no, this isn't a big deal. This isn't historic. I'm sorry to say it, but Hollywood isn't back. Maybe the tax breaks will get you a couple extra Hulu shoots in Burbank, but the damage has already been done. Production in L.A. is down by a third. The average unemployment rate in film and TV right now is 11%. It has doubled in the past two years. So what you're dealing with here is the decline

of an industry that is structural. It's not cyclical. And you're not going to fix it with tax incentives. Hollywood is dying. And you know, you can appreciate the efforts that the California government is trying to make here, but you can't bring a corpse back to life with a tax break. You've got to move on to other things. You've got to recognize. that the entertainment industry isn't happening on the production set anymore. It's happening in people's homes, in people's living rooms. It's happening in front of an iPhone camera attached to a tripod. It's happening in front of a webcam on a live stream.

We are beyond incentives at this point. We're beyond tax breaks. The future has arrived. So we appreciate the effort, California. And yes, we all miss Hollywood. Who doesn't love a class? classic movie. It was fun while it lasted. But let's be real with ourselves. Hollywood is not back. And no number of press releases from the California state government is going to change

our opinion on that. Okay, that's it for today. This episode was produced by Claire Miller, edited by Joel Patterson and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our associate producer is Alison Weiss. Our research team is Dan Shalan, Laura Jana, Isabella Kinsel, and Mia. S Averio. Thanks for listening to Property Markets. I'm Ed Elson. Join us tomorrow for our conversation with Mark Zandi, Chief Economist at Moody's Analytics.