← Back to context

Comment by vannevar

3 hours ago

And if they actually constructed the deal that way, it would be fine. But by essentially creating a sham sale where they return the cash back to the customer in return for equity, Nvidia can book revenue and claim non-existent cash flow. The key is that the sale would not have happened without the corresponding equity deal. Nvidia had no discretion to use that cash any other way, so the "cash flow" in that case is illusory.

I don't see the issue. Goods valued at that amount changed hands. Why shouldn't bartering be booked as cash flow? The regulator is going to require you to value it for them regardless.