According to Fortune, Goldman Sachs recently told its wealthiest clients at the At the Helm summit in Aspen that we’re not in an AI bubble despite comparisons to the dot-com boom. The bank’s Private Wealth Management division members have average account sizes exceeding $75 million and include thirty- and forty-somethings with assets ranging from $10 million to $1 billion. These young wealthy clients are particularly interested in AI applications in healthcare, where it can interpret brain scans twice as accurately as professionals and detect early signs of over 1,000 diseases. The AI market is currently valued at $280 billion, with McKinsey projecting AI could drive $4.4 trillion in added productivity growth long-term. However, energy demands are massive – by 2028, AI alone could consume electricity equivalent to powering 22% of all U.S. households.
So are we really not in a bubble?
Here’s the thing: when a $238 billion bank tells its richest clients something isn’t a bubble, you have to wonder who they’re really trying to convince. Brittany Boals Moeller from Goldman’s San Francisco PWM division admits there will be “winners and losers” and that “some valuations are overblown.” That sounds suspiciously like bubble talk to me. Remember, these are the same people who make money whether their clients win or lose on AI investments. The timing is interesting too – right when people are starting to question whether AI valuations have gotten completely disconnected from reality.
The elephant in the server room
What really stood out to me was the energy discussion. These wealthy investors aren’t just thinking about which AI startup to throw money at – they’re worried about the power grid. According to Department of Energy reports, more than half of data center electricity could be going to AI within three years. That’s an insane acceleration. Basically, we’re building a technology that might consume power at levels we can’t sustainably support. And yet these same investors see it as an “interesting investment opportunity.” Talk about having your cake and eating it too.
Healthcare revolution or overpromise?
The healthcare applications sound impressive – detecting diseases early, reading scans better than humans. The World Economic Forum talks about AI transforming global health, but let’s be real: most of these applications are still in experimental stages. How many are actually deployed in hospitals today? And when you’ve got a $280 billion market chasing relatively few proven use cases, that smells like recipe for disappointment. These wealthy millennials might be “early adopters” as Goldman says, but early adoption in technology often means being first to lose money on bad bets.
The productivity question
McKinsey’s $4.4 trillion productivity projection gets thrown around a lot, but I’m skeptical. We’ve seen this movie before with every major technology shift. The consulting firm’s research suggests AI could unlock massive workplace potential, but implementing AI at scale across corporations is messy, expensive, and often doesn’t deliver the promised returns. And let’s not forget the disruption factor – how many jobs get automated away before we see those productivity gains? These wealthy investors might be excited about getting “closer to the technology,” but regular workers are probably more concerned about whether they’ll have jobs to be productive in.
