One is not spending anything out of the ordinary up until this point in comparison to their competition. But the Apple Silicon design group might start spending some money on something practical, something that might begin the typical Apple long-range process of replacing two or three existing companies within their current supply chain, but that’s nothing new over the last 25 years.

Not based on the evidence of how they allocate capital. Meta wasted $80B on the Metaverse, for example. Apollo allocates capital as their day job. Mag7 allocates by vibes.

https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/mark-z...

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/19/technology/mark-zuckerber... | https://archive.today/iEGAj

Vanguard holds and manages index funds and are, broadly speaking, not active managers. Apollo is a sophisticated, active capital market participant|manager.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Global_Management

I mean, I'd assume this deck was trying to sell something. But the relevant comparison is to stonk-bros on HN LARPing as hedge fund managers, not Vanguard.

Which, to be fair, Vanguard has earned a good deal of trust from me on the passive investment side of the equation, although I don't think it's meaningful to make it linearly proportional to the total size of their managed assets? I'm not even sure how I'd operationalize that in reality.

Having actual skin in the game on getting an answer right is generally a sign of credibility, though.

That said, without context I'm not really drawing any conclusions from this.

in pecunia veritas , an old HN favorite.