A big problem in discussions about Nvidia is that people can't distinguish between:

1. The equity investments Nvidia has made in its customers.

2. The guarantees/backstops it has extended to some of its customers.

3. Vendor financing.

The vendor financing is the least interesting of the bunch. Nvidia has already disclosed that when it provides vendor financing, the average customer pays in less than 60 days. These are not long-term financing arrangements and virtually every big company sells on these type of terms (net-30, net-60, etc.).

The equity investments and guarantees are where there is room for legitimate debate.

> equity investments and guarantees are where there is room for legitimate debate

The guarantees dwarf the equity investments. If there is a shenanigan, it's going to be there.

A problem: the line between the guarantees and traditional vendor financing is blurry–one could argue use commitments are no different from repurchase commitments.