AI Can No Longer Save Big Tech Stocks
Recently, after major Chinese internet companies disclosed their quarterly financial reports, an interesting phenomenon emerged: the stock prices of Tencent, Alibaba, Baidu, Kuaishou, and NetEase all fell. The sole exception was Xiaomi. The decline occurred despite these companies actively investing in and developing AI technologies. The consensus around AI's importance is stronger than ever, yet this very consensus is making it harder for AI alone to generate stock market premiums.
The market's focus has shifted. Two or three years ago, simply announcing a large model or an "All in AI" strategy could boost valuations, as investors were judging who would secure a place in the AI era. Now, with nearly all major players having entered the AI arena, the key question has become: **What tangible change has AI brought to your company?**
This question reveals six distinct challenges:
* **Tencent** faces a capital allocation dilemma. Its core businesses (gaming, advertising) are highly profitable, and AI is enhancing their efficiency. However, massive AI investments (capital expenditure surged 176% YoY) are consuming this cash flow, altering the company's traditionally strong capital return model. The core question is: how much more needs to be spent?
* **Alibaba** is attempting to rebuild part of its empire around AI, with a clear chain involving its Qianwen model, Alibaba Cloud, and AI infrastructure. While AI-related revenue is growing robustly, it has also triggered a massive reinvestment cycle (capex up 75% YoY), raising concerns that the company's renewed focus on profitability and shareholder returns might be undermined.
* **Baidu** confronts a brutal race against time. Its core AI business is growing (up 25% YoY), but its legacy online marketing revenue is declining sharply (down 19%). The critical issue is whether its new AI-driven businesses can grow faster than its old search advertising engine shrinks. AI is not just an add-on but a necessary replacement.
* **Kuaishou** presents a paradox. Its AI product, Kling, is a standout success, with revenue exceeding 850 million RMB (growth over 200% YoY), proving its commercial viability. However, this stellar performance is not yet large enough to offset slow overall group growth (revenue up only 1.4%), highlighting the gap between a "good" new business and one "big enough to change the company."
* **Xiaomi's** primary growth engine is currently its electric vehicles, not AI. For Xiaomi, AI acts more as a foundational layer integrating its ecosystem of phones, cars, appliances, and robots. Its bet is that controlling numerous hardware endpoints could provide a significant future AI advantage, though this multi-front strategy (phones, cars, chips, AI) is capital-intensive.
* **NetEase** offers a different perspective. It extensively uses AI in game development to boost efficiency and content creation but hasn't rushed to rebrand itself as an "AI company." Its core value still stems from gameplay, content, and operations. This suggests that not every internet company's worth needs to be redefined by AI; sometimes, AI is best as a powerful supporting tool.
In conclusion, AI has not leveled the playing field. Instead, it acts as a **magnifying glass**, amplifying each company's existing strengths, weaknesses, cash flows, and historical burdens. With models and computing power becoming standard, the market is returning to fundamental questions: Is the core business healthy? Can AI be translated into revenue, profit, or efficiency gains? And what is the cost? The strong consensus on AI has made the "AI premium" elusive, leading to six different corporate destinies within the same AI era.
marsbitHá 1m
