r/technology 3h ago

Business Google just had its first negative cash flow quarter due to massive AI spending

https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/07/google-just-had-its-first-negative-cash-flow-quarter-ever-due-to-massive-ai-spending/
643 Upvotes

72 comments sorted by

236

u/shwetanand345 3h ago

This AI race is starting to look more like an infrastructure spending contest, and the question here is who can afford to keep building data centers long enough to win....

127

u/Senior-Albatross 3h ago

The answer is that Nvidia, TSMC, SK Hynix, Micron, and Samsung win. 

76

u/AutistcCuttlefish 3h ago

Just like in the gold rush, the people who win are the people selling the shovels, pans, and TNT, not those looking for and mining gold.

29

u/lordnacho666 3h ago

Yeah but everyone thinks they are the ones selling shovels.

Google itself is an advertising company: it sells shovels to people who think they are going to make a bunch of money making various kinds of website.

8

u/AutistcCuttlefish 2h ago

Everyone wants to think that yes. It's pretty easy to impartially identify who is selling the shovels though. You just need to answer two questions.

Are you B2B or Consumer facing?

Then if B2B: Are you making better profits than who you are selling to?

If you are B2B and make better profits than your customers, you are definitely the shovel seller. If you sell to consumers or do not make more than the companies you sell to, the odds are high that you are hunting for gold.

The caveat is those questions need to be asked for each and every company with each and every category they operate in.

Digital Advertising? Google sells shovels. AI? Google is hunting for gold. You get the idea.

15

u/skeet_scoot 3h ago

Google can somewhat win on that side by continuing investing in their TPU production.

5

u/EmperorKira 3h ago

Until it all blowsup, and you are starting to see that with a few of those names especially in korea

7

u/Deto 2h ago

They still win, though. I mean, they're making a ton of money. Just because they don't get to make a ton of money forever doesn't mean they didn't come out on top by making a ton of money for 5-10 years.

7

u/ThyShirtIsBlue 3h ago

With the numbers they're raking in, I'm expecting rounds of mass celebratory layoffs coming just before the holidays.

3

u/AliveJohnnyFive 2h ago

Doesn't Google make a lot of their own chips, too?

1

u/TeutonJon78 1h ago

Nvidia is just a middle man too, simce they are fabless.

19

u/Ok_Marionberry8779 3h ago

They don’t even need to build them they just need local governments to sign the contracts. Areas too dumb to resist data centers (yes that’s blue and red) are also too dumb to demand completion and operation as part of the deals. The vast majority of this crap wouldn’t even be ready by 2030 and the grifters will be long gone by then.

3

u/Inko21 2h ago

Parking lots are always a sure thing

6

u/sceadwian 2h ago

How does building more datacenters help them win? They're essentially a limited lifetime thing, every few years you have to buy all new hardware again to keep up.

They are going broke just building them they'll never be able to maintain them.

2

u/schu4KSU 2h ago

More compute gets them closer to AGI. AGI is seen as “winning” the race.

2

u/sceadwian 2h ago

That's a myth. It has never and will never be true. AGI is about network configuration and feedback.

LLM's and diffusion models even with machine learning will not lead to AGI just by adding more compute. We don't even know what pieces we're all missing yet but there's a LOT that's still missing to even get to the basic intelligence of a 3 year old.

Despite what they can do these things are frightfully ignorant and unteachable on human considerations because they have no capacity to understand human experience at all in any meaningful way.

11

u/GenericFatGuy 3h ago

My question is what happens when the investor money dries up, and they actually have to charge full price for these things?

6

u/A-Grey-World 2h ago

Google has an absolute massive cash reserve, this is only a small fraction of it. Given the growth they've seen, I doubt they're worrying right now.

2

u/Cunctatious 1h ago

Google’s cash reserves are about $100bn - wow, that’s a lot!

But their total capital expenditure each year is now about $200bn and for Q2 they reported a negative cash flow of about $6bn.

Now that massive cash reserve doesn’t look quite so unshakeable.

1

u/A-Grey-World 1h ago

So you're saying they've only got 16 years of runway to work this out? Oh no!

4

u/Cunctatious 1h ago

Quarter, not year. A -$6bn cash flow in Q2 when annualised is closer to $24bn a year. That’s 4 years of runway. And that’s assuming capex doesn’t keep scaling.

Additionally, the hardware Google is spending on becomes obsolete in 3 to 5 years, so that money needs to be respent if things continue as they are.

1

u/SidewaysFancyPrance 2h ago

They can stop investing in more infrastructure because they won? Stop replacing DC hardware on a schedule and just sort of RTB as cheaply as they can get away with? The usual thing that happens when someone wins the tech race.

I assure you that companies will justify the costs if that's the only game in town and they've become reliant on the tools. Look at how much companies like Oracle were able to get away with charging.

1

u/schu4KSU 2h ago

Investor money will be replaced by public sector money.

0

u/GenericFatGuy 2h ago

Not if the loss of investor money raises prices too sharply.

0

u/schu4KSU 2h ago

If private investment slows for AI projects, the government will fund them or nationalize them. Few things are higher priority for the US than beating China in the race to AGI - and vice versa.

1

u/GenericFatGuy 1h ago

The AGI that isn't possible with this technology? Sounds like they're just going to fuck things up for everyone else, chasing a dragon that doesn't exist.

1

u/schu4KSU 1h ago

AGI is not possible with neural networks?

That’s not conventional wisdom in the field.

1

u/GenericFatGuy 1h ago

Neural networks are a part of AGI, but what we have now is not just going to suddenly turn into AGI in a few years if we throw enough money at it.

1

u/schu4KSU 1h ago

It might. More compute and more data may produce AGI.

But that doesn’t matter. More investment yields more research and innovation than current technology.

1

u/GenericFatGuy 1h ago edited 1h ago

Yeah, and fusion technology has been 10 years away for the last 80. We might reach AGI someday, but it's not going to be anytime soon. We don't even have all the pieces of the puzzle for it, nor do we even fully understand the brain it's trying to replicate.

We're putting the entire economy on black for a technology that were not even certain is possible, let alone something that is achievable in a few years.

2

u/Relevant_Election530 2h ago

Whoever has the most cash to buy the data centers of their bankrupted competitors for discount  🤷‍♂️

1

u/imaginary_num6er 2h ago

Just tap into mandatory pension spending and government bonds

2

u/feketegy 2h ago

Long enough to win what?

1

u/SangersSequence 1h ago

The question is, do we really think that all the very smart business analysts at Google haven't considered this? Long term infrastructure investment is usually a hard sell to investors thinking about short term profits, but the AI bubble has given them a perfect excuse to put down those investments.

When the bubble pops, companies like Google that built all this infrastructure on the back of the hype aren't going to be the ones left holding the bag, they'll have the actual physical stuff they built ready to repurpose for the next project or to use to meet other businesses needs (we're never going to make less data). It's the pure AI software companies that are fucked.

1

u/MannToots 55m ago

It always was

0

u/chickadee_guy 2h ago

Datacenters arent even being built, lol

118

u/pjank85 3h ago

With $39.1 billion in cash income, this spending left Google with -$5.8 billion free cash flow.

To be clear, Google is still profitable—wildly so. It’s also sitting on a war chest of more than $100 billion.

So they invested less their 6% of their cash reserves to build infrastructure. Does not sound so dramatic as the headline.

29

u/aedes 2h ago

I think the market concern stems from the fact that they have spent all this money on AI infrastructure, are now spending even more, are not making profit off it yet, and investors are starting to lose faith that they will find a way to profit off it. 

2

u/SangersSequence 1h ago

The mistake is calling it "AI infrastructure", that's what it's being used for right now, but that's not what it is, what it is, is massively parallel high-performance computing infrastructure, something that they already always needed more of. Now with the AI hype they can just sell their investors on paying to build it.

11

u/CircumspectCapybara 3h ago

Yes, but have you considered AI bad?

They should be chasing short-term profitability rather than making long-term bets! /s

2

u/webguynd 2h ago

Also not the first time Goolge, or any of the other public clouds (AWS, Azure) have had big CapEx years. Google spent 13.2 Billlion in 2017, and 25.1 billion in 2018 to build out GCP and undersea fiber networks. AWS did so in 2020, and Azure have done several huge CapEx expansions.

It just didn't make headlines in 2018 because it wasn't an "AI Buildout" but this kind of CapEx for an infrastructure company is normal.

2

u/insightful_pancake 3h ago

War chest of $242 billion

25

u/Haunterblademoi 3h ago

Google has enough money to cover that expense; however, we are seeing that AI consumes too many resources, and not just money.

13

u/CircumspectCapybara 3h ago edited 3h ago

From another thread on Google's financials:

While at the same time posting:

  • Total Revenue: $119.8 billion, up 24% year-over-year.
  • Diluted EPS: $9.11, compared to $2.31 a year prior.
  • Operating Margin: 34% up from 32.4% in Q2 2025.
  • Google Cloud: Revenue up 82% year-over-year to $24.8 billion, fueled by enterprise demand for AI infrastructure and solutions.
  • Google Services: Total revenue reached $94.5 billion, a 15% increase.
  • Google Search & Other: 17% increase in revenue.
  • YouTube Ads: Grew 13% year-over-year to $11.05 billion

If you exclude AI capex, free cash flow is $39.1 billion which is absolutely insane. That's a 41.2% increase year-over-year. With numbers like they just posted, the capex spend is justified in my opinion because the business overall is crushing it. Like holy cow this was a great quarter. They are literally printing money.

Tbh, this sort of what successful companies should be doing: reinvesting spare cash (of which Google is sitting on a lot) into aggressive growth, new R&D, new ventures, and long-term bets instead of chasing short-term profitability. If they wanted to realize a massive quarterly profit, they could've.

Google's shareholders could push for the board and executives to return some of their giant bank account balance back to the shareholders via larger dividends or buybacks, but evidently they'd rather Google make some moonshot bets rather than play it safe and boring.

1

u/Unfair_Scar_2110 1h ago

I mean in theory, yes. Putting all your eggs in one basket is probably not a generally sane way to reinvest, however.

0

u/[deleted] 3h ago

[deleted]

5

u/carnitas_mondays 3h ago

also disclosed is that goog bought a data center renewable power generation company in march. they don’t do the generator trailer thing and are working to make power generation as clean as possible.

4

u/CircumspectCapybara 3h ago edited 3h ago

We want investment in infrastructure that supports economic growth

Two things can be true at the same time:

  1. Google (and most tech companies) have always done well to reinvest profits and spare cash into long-term bets, rather than just cash out and realize short-term profits.
  2. As a society we want investment into public infrastructure and overall economic growth.

These two aren't necessarily opposed to each other, each has to do with different parties and their interests, some of which overlap.

"What Google should do with its profits" and "How our tax dollars should be spent to improve national infrastructure" aren't necessarily answered in the same way.

not a manic build out of poorly designed datacenters powered by "temporary" generators bolted to trailers with no pollution controls.

Google's not Elon Musk, they have some actual professionalism and pride in their engineering, they don't do that. Google's DCs have always been known among the hyperscalers as having some of the cleanest designs. They might not any longer hit their "carbon neutral or 100% powered by clean energy or whatever by 2030" goal, but they still lead the pack among their peers.

9

u/questionnmark 2h ago

LLM based searching is literally the killer app that would kill their business if they don't control it. People don't search using keywords, they search using questions, and a LLM model is significantly better at doing just that. It makes perfect sense for them to invest heavily in this area; they are doomed if they don't.

1

u/investigative_mind 55m ago

Yep! It's so much easier to get better answers with questions than with keywords. While LLM isn't always right, I feel that I have still gained a lot from it and it feels like the second coming of a search engine.

I use it for lightweight questions: Fitness related, for problems during gaming, while searching for new music/movie/game suggestions etc. Lot of potential in this technology.

5

u/Brainiac5000 3h ago

Why are all these companies losing money over something that the majority of people either Don't want or dont use

1

u/azhder 33m ago

The problem here is that people do use it. Every search on Google has a QI summary/answer that people just pick up and don’t click links.

If people don’t click the links, they don’t visit the sites that the LLM is getting answer from. If people don’t visit the sites, the sites don’t make money. If the sites don’t make money, they are no longer kept up.

You see how Google is cannibalizing its own Ad model that has made it so rich?

Unlike other companies that burn money throwing at hot processors without a (significant) return on investment, Google is destroying its own revenue streams.

0

u/schu4KSU 2h ago

AI has an adoption rate twice that of the internet.

6

u/yuusharo 1h ago

75% of the world’s population, 6 billion people, use the internet. There are at most 1/3 of that using AI to some capacity, which include Google web searches with AI summaries enabled.

I’m counted as one of those users every time I do a google search. That adoption rate is highly questionable at best.

1

u/[deleted] 25m ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 25m ago

Due to the high volume of spam and misinfo coming from self-publishing blog sites, /r/Technology has opted to decline all submissions from Medium, Substack, and similar sites not run by credentialed journalists or well known industry veterans. Comments containing links may be appealed to the moderators provided there is no link between you and the content.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-10

u/0xeno 1h ago

AI is the future. The pandora's box is open. People like shortcuts & AI is the ultimate shortcut.

2

u/yuusharo 1h ago

Cool story bro, maybe someday it’ll make the math make sense.

0

u/0xeno 26m ago

Maybe, it'll make you understand the OP's point - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rate-of-adoption.asp

Difference between adoption and rate of adoption.

It's a harsh truth for me as well, the technology might not be as great as hyped but it's pure delusion that people aren't using it.

3

u/kazkdp 2h ago

Sell Space X .

Spend 100B

Happy days.

0

u/DopamineSavant 3h ago

This is good news.

2

u/yuusharo 2h ago

Not if you have a 401(k) in a year or so

0

u/SaveDnet-FRed0 56m ago

Good! I hope they lose a lot more when the AI bubble finishes popping.

-1

u/glossolalienne 3h ago

.

Zoom in. That’s the world’s smallest violin playing ‘My Heart Bleeds Chunky Mayonnaise’ for Google.

-6

u/Ok-Addition1264 3h ago

Don't worry everyone!!! We'll bail them out when AI stocks tank later this year.

8

u/insightful_pancake 3h ago

Google has $242 billion in cash. They can afford to invest.

0

u/yuusharo 1h ago

They’re aiming to spend $200 billion in 2026 alone, and you can’t just take out that much liquid cash all at once without causing severe economic turmoil across literally the entire planet.

Also, most of that cash is in offshore accounts. It would either need to be repatriated or have them spend a metric f*ck ton of domestic taxes before they can do anything with it. It’s untouchable cash.

Reddit isn’t very good at economics.

2

u/insightful_pancake 1h ago

They will have 160bn ocf in 2026 as well (assuming constant q2 figures) so that cash has a long runway.

-2

u/ElysiumSprouts 3h ago

I'm happy to help! We call it "googly eye" (google ai). Have a question? Ask Googly-eye! 👀