So they say central banks are buying gold

I did some research and tried to put pieces together.

1/ Central banks are buying, but top country is Poland (National Bank of Poland).

None of G7 is top buyers in 2025 till Nov.

German is a small buyer.

Source: IMF, respective central banks, World Gold Council

 

2/ The total buying from central banks surged in 2022

2022 vs 2021, more than doubled

2022 vs 2018, more than 50% surge

Year
Annual central bank net gold purchases, tonnes
2014 601.2
2015 579.6
2016 394.9
2017 378.6
2018 656.2
2019 605.4
2020 254.9
2021 450.1
2022 1080.0
2023 1050.8
2024 1089.4

Source: www.visualcapitalist.com

3/ Many gold buyers are Russia trading partners, except for Poland

Six of top seven central bank gold buyers in 2025 through Nov is a top Russia trading partner.

Poland (no)

Kazakhstan (yes)

Brazil (yes)

Azerbaijan (yes)

Turkey (yes)

China (yes)

Czech (yes)

Top Russia trading partners in 2024.

Source: oec.world


It looks possible that as Russia doesn’t want to accept or own USD, or it can’t use USD, its trading partners are buying gold as a form of payment.

 

Chatted with ChatGPT and created model for gold price

With a 5-year time frame, I tried to create a gold price model for 2028, based on 2023 gold price.

Gold_2028 (USD/oz)
– Low $4,087
– Base $6,070
– High $9,556

gold_2028_model_with_deficit_cb

Disclaimer: I am not expert on gold nor did I have spent considerable time in studying it. But I was trying to understand different drivers behind gold price. I asked ChatGPT to pick the coefficients, so there is little credibility behind these coefficients.

 

Xiaomi smartphone GP may drop 30% given rising memory cost

Some simple calculation:

Xiaomi smartphone GPM was 12.6% in 2024, with 192bn revenue.

Xiaomi sold 1.64 billion smartphones that year.

The GP per handset is about 147 RMB in 2024

Across different smartphone models, memory cost is different, ranging from 50-500 per handset.

But in a nutshell, it’s about 12-18% of BOM.

It’s could be about 150 memory cost per handset for Xiaomi, which is similar to GP per handset.

Then if memory cost is rising 50-100%, the entire GP per handset could be at risk.

To offset, Xiaomi may increase prices for customers.

And as a large customer for memory chips, it may not receive full mark-up immediately.

In the end, maybe 1/3 of the memory cost impact of 120 need to be absorbed by Xiaomi.

Then GP per handset could be more like 100-110 RMB.

And as the price increases, volume could be impacted, plus the RMB appreciation recently (two-thirds of Xiaomi smartphone volume is overseas).

Total impact to Xiaomi smartphone GP could be like 65-75bn, or 25-30% negative impact from 2024 level.

Solana note

Solana’s price was up 86% in 2024 and down 34% in 2025.

Most of the pullback happened in q4 of 2025 which was around 40%.

At the end of Q3 2025, Solana price was about $208, still up compared with 2024 year end of $189.

Two most important drivers for Solana network and price are meme coins and stable coins.

For meme coin, it seems the frenzy has cooled down in 2025, using these indexes as reference: CoinDesk Meme Index or MarketVector Meme Coin Index.

On the stable coin side, adoption (stable coin on solana) has more than doubled from $5bn at end of 2024 to $13bn in Sep 2025 according to this, but no meaningful increase in 4q2025.

Human brain vs AI model

Human brain has 86 billion neurons, which forms 100 trillion synaptic connections.

That 100 trillion is the first-order proxy of model “weights”.

Currently, SOTA AI models could have ~2 trillion parameters or model weights.

For example, OpenAI’s GPT 5.2 model is estimated to have 1-5 trillion parameters, while GPT 3 has 175 billion parameters. Meta Llama 4 Behemoth (MoE) has nearly 2 trillion parameters.

Thus AI models now are closer to human brains. Only 50x difference.

However, human brains is not just 100 trillion synaptic connections.

  • A synapse isn’t a single scalar. It has multiple properties (strength, short-term plasticity, release probability, receptor composition, timing effects, etc.). So raw physical degrees of freedom per synapse could be >1.

  • Not all synapses are independently controllable. Biology adds constraints and correlations (developmental wiring rules, local learning, neuromodulators, homeostasis). That means the effective independent DoF is likely lower than “#synapses × variables”.

  • The brain has lots of additional state beyond synapses. Neuron membrane potentials, ion channel states, neuromodulator concentrations, glial regulation, oscillations, etc. That adds dynamic DoF that don’t map cleanly to “parameters” the way a static model does.

Another thing need to keep in mind how energy-efficient a human brain is.

A typical adult brain runs on about ~20 W.

How to operate a SOTA model?

ChatGPT gives me this

for a dense FP16 2T model, 32 H200 GPUs is the “it loads and runs” baseline, while 48–64+ GPUs is where you start getting reasonable headroom + throughput, depending on your target context and requests/sec.

So about 40 kw.

That would be about 2000x energy consumption than human brain.

Of course human is not just about brain, so about 400x.


GPT 5.2 estimated parameters

Alibaba hits out in all directions

a) Delivery

Since 2025, Alibaba used massive subsidies to compete with Meituan.

b) Micro-loan facilitation

In 2025, the industry faced regulatory crackdown on high fees or high APR, while Alibaba’s Ant Group operates at lower APR segment.

c) OTA

Trip.com (previously CTrip), the leader in China OTA, is targeted by regulators recently for antitrust issues.

d) PDD

In e-commerce, the industry faced some scrutiny and PDD is being probed.

Howard Marks’ fallacy

In his book The Most Important Thing Illuminated, Howard Marks wrote this –

Our goal isn’t to find good assets, but good buys. Thus, it’s not what you buy; it’s what you pay for it.

Obviously there is merit to this. Warren Buffett 1.0 could agree with Howard Marks here.

But clearly this contradicts with Charlie Munger and Warren Buffett 2.0, who are willing to pay fair price for good assets.

The “fallacy”, if any, could origin from Marks’ expertise in distressed debts.

A huge difference between equity and debt is that debt doesn’t have unlimited upside.

Debt’s blue sky scenario is limited – receive full payment in interests and face value. Thus price is extremely important.

Equity could have “unlimited” upside for a good company. These good assets have unlimited upside, which makes paying fair price a good deal.

That unlimited upside makes the additional 10% or 20% discount in entry price less relevant.

 

US following China policies?

1/ Drug prices

China used volume-based procurement to lower drug prices by 50-90%.

Trump in May 2025 signed EO seeking to cut drug prices by 59% and 90%.

 

2/ Housing 

In China, “houses are for living in, not for speculation” has been the guideline till 2023.

Trump last week (Jan 7) said US to ban large investors from buying homes.

 

3/ Personal loan interest rate

China asked several funding sources to lower interest rates – banking (Apr 2025) capped at 24%, consumer finance companies average 20% (Oct 2025), micro lenders 4x LPR or ~12% now (Dec 2025).

Trump called for 1-year 10% interest cap on personal loans on Jan 10.

Another reason why old is new and new is old

Please see previous post on Old economy is new and new economy is old.

Here is another reason why this happened.

In the era of AI, robots and space, the TAM is beyond human beings.

The electricity is not only consumed by human, but will also by AI agents and robots.

Robots and AI agents will be the “new population” in physical and virtual forms.

Robots and AI agents will have their own identity, wallet, etc.; robots will need additional space to house.

If we will become multi-planet, we will be building a lot more, which will require a lot of manufacturing capacity, materials, power etc.

Thus, old can become new.

Meanwhile, the human being population may not increase that much.

Those human consumption categories will not increase with the “new population”.

Consumer internet probably won’t have dramatically increased TAM, as the ultimate demand comes from human beings.

Thus, new can become old.


Some will keep being “old”.

E.g. Robots and AI agents will not consume alcohol/baijiu.

Old economy is new and new economy is old

Part of the previous “old economy”, such as industrials (e.g. heavy manufacturing), material (e.g. mining), utilities (e.g. electricity) are becoming the new “new economy” due to AI and related investments.

Indeed, AI isn’t just an app-layer story; it’s a capex + physics story.

They’re on the critical path of AI expansion, and they’re supply-constrained enough to earn economic rents.

Meanwhile, part of the previous “new economy” is becoming old, like software, e-commerce etc.

Software is less scarce, with AI-assisted coding and commoditized building blocks

E-commerce matured in many markets. China is the prime example. China’s gov reported e-commerce (physical goods) growth has been below 10% for 4 consecutive years since 2022.