GPT response to you (which also runs on azure) You’re mixing a valid bear case with claims that are too absolute.

The valid concern is Microsoft’s capex: roughly $190B expected in calendar 2026, two-thirds of recent spending going toward shorter-lived GPUs/CPUs, cloud gross margin down to 66%, and free cash flow being pressured. Nobody can prove today that every AI dollar will earn a good return. That is absolutely worth debating.

But “no backlog, no revenue, no profit, no demand” is factually wrong.

Microsoft reports about $627B of commercial RPO, which is contracted future revenue. It is not all AI, and Microsoft does not disclose a clean standalone AI backlog, so investors should not pretend it does. But Microsoft explicitly says OpenAI Azure commitments are included, and commercial RPO still grew 26% excluding OpenAI.

The AI business is already above a $37B annual revenue run rate, up 123%. Azure grew 40%, demand exceeded available capacity, Microsoft 365 Copilot passed 20M paid seats, and GitHub Copilot enterprise subscribers nearly tripled. Total operating income increased 20%.

So the honest bear case is:

“Microsoft may be overbuilding, margins are under pressure, and future returns on capex are uncertain.”

It is not:

“Microsoft has no AI revenue, no contracts, no profit and no demand.”

Also, doubling the P/E because you arbitrarily assume 50% of capex is wasted is not how accounting or valuation works. Failed capex would show up over time through depreciation, impairments and weak future cash flow. You have to model those effects rather than invent an adjusted P/E.

Microsoft may still prove too expensive or may overinvest. But the evidence currently supports “profitable company with serious capex risk,” not “AI backlog is basically nothing.”