The vendor, the SPV and one tenant
If the tenant slows, the loss lands on lenders holding chips as collateral and on a vendor that has promised to buy them back — neither of which shows up in bank credit statistics.
Broadcom is in talks to raise more than $60bn, and possibly as much as $100bn, to finance a special-purpose vehicle that would buy Broadcom's custom AI chips and lease them to Anthropic, with Anthropic expected to account for more than 40% of the volume. This comes from a single web sweep citing one report; it is not corroborated by a paper of record, and nothing has been priced. Treat the number as indicative and the structure as the point. The structure is the familiar loop, scaled up. Broadcom sells chips to an entity Broadcom has helped fund, and books the sale. The entity's assets are silicon and a lease. The lease is owed by a private company whose revenue at that scale is unproven. Lenders to the SPV hold neither the chipmaker's credit nor the tenant's — they hold a claim on depreciating hardware, and Broadcom has separately pledged to buy back unsold chips and make up the difference on price (TrendForce, via Newtalk). Stack it against what Anthropic already has. Google guarantees $44bn of its data-centre rent, taking roughly 20% equity in the buildings and power projects in exchange. Broadcom, its chip co-designer, guarantees the residual value of the chips. Now Broadcom may fund the vehicle that owns them. Anthropic's suppliers are underwriting Anthropic's ability to pay its suppliers. This is the migration thesis in one deal. None of this appears as bank credit exposure. It appears as vendor receivables, guarantees, and SPV debt held by private funds — measured by nobody in aggregate, marked by the holders.