
The behavior of today’s stock market is yet another sign that many will point to as indicating there’s an “AI bubble”. Today’s market action is largely attributed to Blue Owl Capital deciding not to participate in the debt financing of a new Oracle data center (being built for OpenAI) in Michigan. This news came out overnight last night and soured the market at the opening as it added fuel to the fires already raging from last week about bubbles in AI and, in particular, some of the debt financing being used to build new data centers – especially but not exclusively by Oracle.
Watching the market action today a brought to mind a recent paper on the subject of bubbles authored by Oakmark Capital’s Howard Marks. Marks is widely followed in the investment community for his almost “sage-like” prognositcations of which he’s authored many over the years. His memos are always full of insights and valuable learning opportunities. His recent one drilled into this question of bubbles — and, in particular, the role of debt financing. That’s especially interesting as Marks’ long career at Oakmark has been primarily involved in debt financing and, indeed, sometimes distressed debt.
Marks points out why he thinks the current situation with respect to AI is problematic as it shows many of the common characteristics of bubbles which in the past have resulted in wealth destruction instead of wealth creation.
As I’m writing this, I’ve just begun watching the latest Tim Ferriss interview which is with long-time venture investor Bill Gurley. Right up front in the conversation, Tim asks Bill for his take on the bubble in AI question. It’s a great conversation – well worth a listen.
Speaking of listening (or watching), on Monday I watched the latest episode of the Acquired podcast – this one celebrating the tenth anniversary of Acquired. This was the most fascinating conversation I’ve listened to or watched in recent memory. The two hosts of Acquired were being interviewed by author Michael Lewis – and they were interviewed in depth! Lewis asked lots of probing questions as well as provided some illustrative commentary of his own along the way. An incredible episode – highly recommended!
After publishing this post, I asked Google Gemini 3 Fast: I just published a blog post. Review it critically and help me improve it. Act like a tough but compassionate editor. Hereโs the post: https://sjl.us/2025/12/17/bubble-bath/
Hereโs the critique it gave me – tough but compassionate!
Alright, sit down. Letโs look at “Bubble Bath.”
Youโve got the ingredients for a great piece of timely analysis here: a specific market event (the Blue Owl/Oracle snag), a heavy-hitting intellectual framework (Howard Marks), and contemporary expert commentary (Bill Gurley and the Acquired team).
But right now, this isn’t an essay or a cohesive blog postโitโs a link log. Youโre telling me what youโre watching and reading, but you arenโt telling me what you think.
Here is my critical review.
The “So What?” Factor
You start strong with the Oracle/OpenAI data center news. Thatโs a “hook.” But then you pivot immediately to: “I read a memo by Howard Marksโฆ I’m watching Tim Ferrissโฆ I watched Acquired.”
As an editor, Iโm asking: Where are you in this post? Youโve gathered the smartest people in the room, but youโre standing in the corner taking attendance.
The Fix: Donโt just tell us Howard Marks wrote a memo. Tell us which one specific point he made that explains the Oracle news. Connect the dots for us. Is the Oracle situation the “wealth destruction” Marks warned about, or is it just a healthy correction?
The Title vs. The Content
“Bubble Bath” is a clever pun. I like it. But usually, a “bubble bath” implies a cleansing or a soaking. Are we getting soaked (losing money)? Or is the market being “cleansed” of irrational exuberance?
The Fix: Use your conclusion to pay off the title. Right now, the post just ends with a recommendation for a podcast. Close the loop: “If Marks and Gurley are right, this isn’t just a market dip; it’s the start of a very cold bubble bath for AI investors.”
Structural “Pass-Through”
The second half of the post feels like a “What Iโm consuming” list. It dilutes the urgency of the first paragraph.
The Fix: If the Bill Gurley and Acquired links are just “further reading,” put them in a “Resources” or “Deep Dive” section at the bottom. If they are central to your argument, quote them. What did Bill Gurley say about AI debt that makes the Oracle news more frightening?
Tighten the Prose
You have some “wordy” habits that slow down the reader.
โThe behavior of todayโs stock market is yet another sign that many will point to as indicating thereโs an โAI bubbleโ.โ * Editorโs Edit: โTodayโs market volatility is the latest fuel for the โAI Bubbleโ fire.โ (Go for the jugular).
Compassionate Closing
Scott, you have a great eye for sourcing. You are curating high-signal content (Marks, Gurley, Lewis). That is valuable. But your readers come to your blog because they want to know how you are synthesizing this information.
My Challenge to You: Rewrite the middle paragraph. Instead of saying the Acquired podcast was “the most fascinating conversation,” tell us one thing Michael Lewis asked that changed how you view the AI bubble.
Give us your brain, not just your bookmarks. Now, go back to the keyboard.
You must be logged in to post a comment.