Nvidia Corp CEO Jensen Huang said his company has enough new Blackwell chips to meet increasing demand and that business is “very, very strong."
Speaking on Bloomberg Television, Huang offered a new insight into comments made earlier during his company’s third-quarter earnings report. His reference to the Blackwell product line being “sold out” meant that existing chips were being used at maximum capacity by customers, he said.
“We have planned our supply chain incredibly well,” Huang said. “We have a bunch of Blackwells to sell.”
The comments maintained the bullish tone struck during Nvidia’s report earlier on Nov 19. The company rebutted concerns that the rabid pace of artificial intelligence spending is creating a bubble. Beyond delivering a stronger-than-expected quarterly forecast, Nvidia said it would likely exceed a longer-term projection of US$500 billion ($653.8 billion) for sales of new chips and systems.
See also: Trump deepens tariff cut on Brazilian foods as prices mount
Huang also said Nvidia is getting an increasing portion of data centre spending because its products are adding more capabilities. The forthcoming Vera Rubin generation will deliver about US$35 billion of revenue for Nvidia out of the roughly US$55 billion spent on each gigawatt of computing power, Huang said.
The Chinese market remains a weak spot due to US export restrictions. The company’s forecast for data centre chip sales in the country remains zero, Huang said.
The CEO said he’s working with the governments in Washington and Beijing to try to persuade officials to allow Nvidia back into that giant market. “Until then, we should assume zero,” he said. — Bloomberg
See also: Japan set to unveil largest spending plan since pandemic era
Today’s ‘geopolitical climate change’ the result of ‘long-held, deep convictions’: Balakrishnan
The “messy transition” in international relations today is not a localised storm but the broad impact of “geopolitical climate change”, says Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan. “It’s like an iceberg or a continental ice shelf falling but actually, climate warming has predated that.”
The US’s role as a “benign hegemon” since the end of World War II is “historically unprecedented”, Balakrishnan adds, and pressure has been mounting on the US to “give up on this”.
“What the US did for eight decades was to provide, first, the market; second, technology; [and] third, capital and rules-based economic integration. The first beneficiary of that, apart from Europe, was Japan, and then you had the Asian Tigers — Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore — and then the rest of Southeast Asia. But the real winner of rules-based free trade has actually been China,” says Balakrishnan at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2025 on Nov 19.
The re-election of US President Donald Trump is one expression of these growing pressures. “It is a completely legitimate question for the American voter to say: ‘Wait a minute. Why should we underwrite in blood and treasure this system which seems to have profited the rest of the world?’” adds Balakrishnan.
The US has never met a peer competitor with the “scale, ability and willingness” to reorder the world “in a way that’s favourable to it”, says Balakrishnan. China, however, is “still a middle-income country”, he adds, and “is not able or willing to replace the US as the underwriter of globalisation”.
Trump ‘remarkably consistent’
To stay ahead of Singapore and the region’s corporate and economic trends, click here for Latest Section
Trump has been “uniquely consistent for decades”, says Balakrishnan, citing an 1988 interview with Oprah Winfrey that resurfaced and went viral earlier this year.
“His views on war — anti-war; his views on free trade — that it’s an avenue for America to be taken advantage of; his views on business — in a Main Street, real estate way, as opposed to Wall Street and financial engineering. His views on immigration actually have been remarkably consistent, and I think people don’t give enough marks for that point,” adds Balakrishnan.
Trump may be consistent, but his methodology and presentation “is somewhat novel”, says Balakrishnan, “and people react to that”. “My point is: American policy under President Trump, in fact, is reflecting long-held, deep convictions.”
No trust
The fundamental problem with the US and China is an almost complete lack of strategic trust, says Balakrishnan. “That means each side has to assume the worst of each other, and even if you’re taking precautions, it’s viewed as escalatory.”
Balakrishnan warns that the “weaponisation of everything” — from the US dollar to finance, critical minerals to global supply chains — applies also to diplomacy.
“For every action, there’s an equal and opposite reaction. The weaponisation of everything has led to an erosion of trust, has led to a need to assume the worst and to prepare for it, and in the absence of trust, it’s very hard to actually have strategic alignment,” he adds.
Another casualty is weakening supply chains. During the outbreak of Covid-19, the world realised that even manufacturing face masks — “which is not rocket science” — threw countries into a panic, says Balakrishnan.
“The fracturing of supply chains in the name of national security and in search of resilience actually means a world which hitherto has been based on efficiency is now building supply chains on the basis of near-shoring, onshoring [and] friend-shoring,” he adds. “Economically, what that must mean is some inflation, because you’re no longer choosing the cheapest and the best [or] most efficient; you’re now having other considerations. So, watch that bout of inflation.”
The third impact is on the global commons. The Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change signed in 2015, came about because the US and China “were on the same side and were able to drag the rest of us [into] an imperfect but important agreement”, says Balakrishnan.
“My worry is that we’re going to be unable to deal with the global commons — it means climate change, pandemics, the challenges from Ai, we won’t be able to respond adequately to it because the two key players either are disrupting actively or are spoiling for a fight and are certainly not willing to restrain themselves with multilateral rules imposed by Lilliputian countries… I hope that’s not too depressing,” he adds.
EU must ‘get a grip’
The European Union (EU) is not operating on a sustainable model, says Balakrishnan. “The world has had unsustainable imbalances for some time. If you outsource all manufacturing to China, you outsource all energy to Russia and you outsource security to America — I’m referring to the EU.”
If the EU wishes to have strategic autonomy or independence, it must “get a grip” on its manufacturing, industrial capacity, defence and energy policies, he adds.
In a matter of years, China became the manufacturing centre of the world and enjoyed economies of scale. But this has led to accumulating trade surpluses. “For a while, the Western consumer enjoyed low inflation, low interest rates and high-quality goods at affordable rates, but actually [they] were consuming beyond what they were producing,” says Balakrishnan. “We should not be surprised that this system based on imbalance was not sustainable.”
How would such an imbalance reach equilibrium? If the US shuts its market to the productive capacity of China and the EU follows suit, will China be able to expand its domestic consumption to match its capacity, or will it still try to export its way out? If it does, where will it export to?
“Without being pejorative or making value judgments, just ask yourself: do you need domestic changes to the economic structure of China? I think we do,” says Balakrishnan. “What does Southeast Asia, Africa and South America want? Do we need infrastructure? We do.”
Watch this space, says Balakrishnan near the end of a half-hour chat with Stephanie Flanders, Bloomberg News’ head of economics and government. “I am sure adjustments will occur, both domestically and across borders… The opportunity will be to try to catch these waves, catch these new tides and winds, so that we maximise opportunities for the rest of us.” — Jovi Ho
US has role to play for peace and prosperity, says Singapore
The US has played a critical role in global peace and stability, and has the potential to play that role in the future despite the America First ethos pursued by President Donald Trump, said Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong.
“America’s role is critical for stability and continued prosperity in the world,” Wong said in an interview with Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait at the New Economy Forum in Singapore on Nov 19.
“We certainly hope that America will be actively engaged in the world — maybe not now, maybe not with this administration,” Wong said. “But there will be a time when America can take up its role and be actively engaged, constructive, and continue to have good relations with all its key partners.”
Wong, 52, has repeatedly warned that Trump’s tariff war and deepening disagreement with China on trade and security has ended an era of globalisation and open trade — an environment in which Singapore had flourished.
The recent US-China talks created a “much needed” temporary stabilisation that will provide guardrails for the two economic superpowers to engage. “While it may be a temporary truce, a temporary stabilisation, in the relationship it was much needed,” he said.
The US and China reached a detente following a summit in South Korea in October, although negotiations continue on how Beijing will manage sales of rare earth materials, a key market it dominates. Before the meeting, both Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping had been locked in a cycle of tit-for-tat actions that threatened global trade.
“The intense competition and rivalry will continue, I’m sure,” Wong said. “The mutual distrust and suspicion remains but the guardrails will ensure the rivalry does not slide into a full decoupling, or worse confrontation and conflict.”
Trade-reliant Singapore, like other Southeast Asian nations, continues to balance a delicate relationship between China, its top trading partner, and the US, a key security ally amid ongoing regional disputes over the South China Sea.
“We don’t have to choose” between the two powers, Wong said, adding that the country will handle it “issue by issue” and through the lens of Singapore’s national interest. — Bloomberg
