Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

AI Summary. A survey of 396 enterprises finds only 11% forecast their AI spending within 10% of actual, down from 15% a year earlier, while 62% say an unexpected AI cost altered a business decision and one in four delayed or canceled an AI initiative. 81% report moderate-to-high gross margin impact from AI costs.

Torsten Slok Apollo
Date Posted:

Slok flags a survey of 396 enterprises that found AI adaptation hasn’t improved gross margins in aggregate, with 81% of firms noting a “moderate-to-high gross margin impact” from their AI spending, while 63% saw a 6 to 15pp decrease.

Are companies losing control of their AI spending forecasts?

Core argument: Only 11% of the 396 enterprises surveyed by Mavvrik and Benchmarkit forecast their AI spending within 10% of actual, down from 15% a year earlier.

A new survey by Mavvrik and Benchmarkit of 396 enterprises finds that companies are adopting AI faster than they are building the financial controls to keep its costs in check. Only 11% of firms forecast their AI spending within 10% of actual, down from 15% last year. The survey also shows that those misses are changing decisions, with 62% of firms saying an unexpected AI cost altered a business decision and one in four delaying or canceling an AI initiative. The impact is showing up in profitability too, with 81% of companies reporting moderate-to-high gross margin impact from AI costs, including 63% who see a 6 to 15 percentage point decrease.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Only 11% of the 396 enterprises surveyed by Mavvrik and Benchmarkit forecast their AI spending within 10% of actual, down from 15% a year earlier.
  2. In the Mavvrik and Benchmarkit survey, 62% of firms said an unexpected AI cost altered a business decision, and one in four delayed or canceled an AI initiative.
  3. The survey reports that 81% of companies see moderate-to-high gross margin impact from AI costs, including 63% citing a 6 to 15 percentage point decrease.

Related Articles:

  • Tech’s Trillion-Dollar Internal Inconsistency — Wall Street analysts covering technology project the sector's operating cash flow will more than double to roughly $2.4tn by 2028, a gain of over $1.2tn, while analysts covering the rest of the S&P 500 — technology's customers — project those firms will add far less cash flow. These sector-by-sector forecasts are internally inconsistent.
  • How Much Revenue Does The AI Buildout Need In 2030? — The authors estimate AI capital spending of $560bn in 2026 and, in a high-investment case, $3.5tn of net AI capital in service by 2030, requiring roughly $1.3tn in annual infrastructure revenue once depreciation, operating costs and a 15% return are covered. That implies 7.4x growth from current annualized revenues, with downstream revenues of $1.9–2.6tn.
  • Writing Code vs. Shipping Code: Productivity Effects Across Generations of AI Coding Tools — The authors estimate that AI coding tools raise developers' task-level productivity by about 40% with autocomplete, 140% including synchronous agents, and 180% with asynchronous agents, with larger effects for less active developers. Gains attenuate up the production chain: synchronous agents raise lines of code 741% and pull requests 65% but releases only 20%.
Showing 96 database articles primarily about Investment