Burry says NVIDIA's GPU "resale value" chart is really a rent forecast. I checked the source: he's right. I still don't think it's a reason to short NVIDIA.
**TL;DR:**
* The values on NVIDIA's slide are Silicon Data's discounted rent, not resale prices, and they move with rent.
* But the memory shortage holding rent up is backed by the buyer, not just the sellers, and runs past his September 2027 puts.
* The lessors mostly pay off their loans inside their contracts, and where they don't, the credit market is charging for it.
I own NVIDIA, and The Big Short was the first movie I watched when I started investing, so I read Burry's October 1 post properly instead of scrolling past.
[](https://preview.redd.it/burry-says-nvidias-gpu-resale-value-chart-is-really-a-rent-v0-f2iffaecgnth1.png?width=1912&format=png&auto=webp&s=fb3cfd1c0c35dd33f01200247e66927891ee968b)
His target is one slide from NVIDIA's September investor deck. It shows A100, H100 and B200 values far above a five-year depreciation curve. The footnote cites Silicon Data, and Silicon Data's own methodology says those values are a discounted cash flow of projected rent over an eight-year life. Nobody actually sold a used B200 for $72,695.
The clearest evidence: Silicon Data's H100 value was $14,976 in November 2025 and $22,068 in June 2026. Same chip; its rent went from $1.99 to $2.74 an hour. And the last time a GPU shortage eased, H100 rent fell 44% in five months (Sept 2024 to Feb 2025). On all of that, Burry is right.
[](https://preview.redd.it/burry-says-nvidias-gpu-resale-value-chart-is-really-a-rent-v0-ghfy4wgggnth1.png?width=1938&format=png&auto=webp&s=6446fdfaea51aba5a1cf42034879aa22439a6579)
Where I disagree:
* **His clock.** His puts expire September 2027. The evidence that the memory shortage lasts comes from the buyer, not just the sellers. NVIDIA's CFO lowered her own Q4 margin guidance because of memory prices and said supply stays a bottleneck through January 2028. NVIDIA's purchase commitments went from $119B to $279B in one quarter, mostly memory. Samsung says a new fab takes more than three years to produce.
* **The cushion.** B200 rent is $5.86/hr. Assuming 40% of rent goes to operating costs (close to CoreWeave's 59% adjusted EBITDA margin), this is how far it can fall before a new B200 stops paying for itself in six years:
* 70% utilization, ignoring the cost of money: 65% (to $2.04)
* 50% utilization, ignoring the cost of money: 51% ($2.85)
* 70% utilization, money at 10% a year (about what CoreWeave's riskiest loan costs): 52% ($2.81)
* 50% utilization, money at 10% a year: 33% ($3.93). That's the case that would make me wrong.
[](https://preview.redd.it/burry-says-nvidias-gpu-resale-value-chart-is-really-a-rent-v0-j5134ysignth1.png?width=1879&format=png&auto=webp&s=6bbedcc539d32c4641d4a4c671dbfa0b96889721)
* **His target.** His 1968 analogy is about leasing companies that borrowed against machines and had to keep re-renting them. Today's version is the neoclouds. Nebius's customers prepay 50% to 60% of capex. CoreWeave's main loans are repaid inside each customer contract. Its one exception, DDTL 5.5, runs about five years against customer contracts averaging three, so the lenders carry renewal risk. The CFO called it the first of its loans "to include shorter duration customer contracts" (Q2 call, Aug 11). It's rated Ba2/BB+ and priced at SOFR + 5.50%, and CoreWeave's 5-year CDS is about 8.2%. In 2006 this kind of risk was rated investment grade and cheap to insure. This time it's priced.
[](https://preview.redd.it/burry-says-nvidias-gpu-resale-value-chart-is-really-a-rent-v0-buv45khlgnth1.png?width=1735&format=png&auto=webp&s=e0be6262a4b37cd9263b214e3b956db029f647c0)
NVIDIA isn't risk-free. Its worst-case exposure to the companies it helps finance is $164.5B (guarantees, AI cloud capacity backstops and leases), about 37% of FY28 consensus EBITDA, though none of the $105B Ohio guarantee is live before his puts expire.
The bigger risk to my position isn't rent. NVIDIA trades at about 16.5x forward earnings, and if the market prices the end of the shortage early, the way it already prices Micron at 6.1x, the stock could fall 36% with rent intact. Price isn't one of my break conditions, so if that happened with the business intact, I'd hold and add. Whether the multiple holds depends on what demand looks like after the shortage, and that's my next post.
What would prove me wrong: Silicon Data's B200 rent index below $2.85 for three straight months before September 2027 (roughly where a new B200 stops paying for itself in six years at 50% utilization, or at 70% with 10% debt), or Micron, Samsung or SK hynix saying memory supply and demand balance in 2027. I start reviewing below $3.93, where half-empty clusters funded at 10% stop paying.
Full post with charts and sources: [https://darrenleung1.substack.com/p/burry-is-right-about-the-gpus-hes](https://darrenleung1.substack.com/p/burry-is-right-about-the-gpus-hes)
