The starting point was that competition would prevent AI providers from doubling the price of tokens, because there's lots of models running on lots of providers.

This is in the context of the article, that paints a world where it would be unreasonable not to spend $250k per head per year in tokens.

My argument is the current situation is temporary, and _if_ LLMs provide that much value, then the market will consolidate into a handful of providers, that'll be mostly free to dictate their prices.

> If they start showing much higher returns on assets, then one of the many infra providers just builds a data center, fills it with GPUs, and rents it out at 5% lower price. This is the market mechanism.

Except when the GPUs, memory, and power are in short supply. The demand is higher than the supply, prices go up, and whoever has the deeper pockets, usually the bigger and more established party, wins.