历史惊人重演？大空头Burry预警：美股将陷入“2000年式熊市”，AI泡沫两年内破灭

Core Viewpoint - Michael Burry expresses a highly pessimistic outlook on the U.S. stock market, predicting a prolonged bear market similar to that of 2000, driven by the dominance of passive investment strategies [2][5][21]. Group 1: Market Outlook - Burry believes that the current market structure, dominated by passive funds (over 50%), will lead to a scenario where the entire market declines simultaneously, making it difficult to protect oneself with long positions [6][24]. - He compares the current AI investment frenzy to the "data transmission bubble" of 2000, noting a lag between capital expenditure and market peaks [3][8]. - Burry anticipates that Palantir's stock, currently at $200, is overvalued and should be worth $30 or less, leading him to buy out-of-the-money put options with a strike price of $50 [6][11]. Group 2: Palantir's Financial Health - Burry criticizes Palantir's financial structure, highlighting that the company has created multiple billionaires without generating significant profits, as its stock-based compensation is nearly equal to its profits [7][32]. - He points out that Palantir's revenue from government contracts has significantly decreased, and the company is now focusing on enterprise clients, which may not yield the expected profitability [31][32]. - Burry emphasizes that the current valuation of Palantir is unsustainable, as the company has not produced specialized AI products despite being perceived as a leader in the field [33][36]. Group 3: AI and Google - Burry warns that AI poses a serious threat to Google's core cash flow from its search business, as AI search is significantly more expensive compared to traditional search methods [3][42]. - He argues that most users will access AI services for free, and the willingness to pay for large models will be minimal, with real profits likely confined to the developer ecosystem [9][43]. Group 4: Critique of the Federal Reserve - Burry holds a sharp critique of the Federal Reserve, claiming it has not contributed positively over its century-long existence and advocates for its abolition, suggesting that its functions should be transferred to the Treasury [4][48][49].