This is the most important chart in AI right now because it shows where AI spending is actually going by model capability. Of Anthropic’s models, Fable (dark blue bottom) is only 11% of revenue. Very few companies want to pay for the best model. The majority of spending is going towards Opus 4.8/5. This means most businesses want very strong models but don’t feel it’s worth paying for the best models. Opus 4.8/5 is basically the performance of Chinese open-source models like Kimi K3 and GLM-5.3. But the Chinese models are cheaper to use. This means there’s likely very strong underlying demand for Chinese open-source models, but it takes time for US businesses to make the shift and some are worried about regulatory or other risks. Overall, there’s a big capabilities overhang in AI that makes it harder to justify massive investment in ever more powerful models from a sheer commercial standpoint. Businesses are still just trying to find interesting ways to use AI in general, much less push the limit with absolute frontier models. Chart source: ft.com/content/5ee49718-c258…

The thing I’m most surprised by with Beijing’s block of the Manus deal is that they let it get this far. Manus made a big splash last year and was even touted on Chinese state media. The move to Singapore might’ve seemed smart from a commercial standpoint, but the optics were bad for China. China wants its star AI companies listing on Hong Kong and Shanghai, not shedding their China staff and moving out of the country. Then after the deal with Meta was announced in December, there were soon warning signs from Beijing. While the move to Singapore may have raised some eyebrows, the outright acquisition by a US company was clearly crossing a line for Beijing. If there’s a chilling effect from this move, then that’s probably Beijing’s intended point. As I wrote earlier in an FT op-ed, I expected Beijing to want to stop the “Manus route” from becoming a trend. Ever since Jack Ma, Chinese tech entrepreneurs have treaded carefully, fearful of getting in trouble with Beijing. But the lines are never fully clear and can be redrawn after the fact. What has become clear is that Chinese companies are increasingly reaching the tech frontier. And like other countries with tech firms at the frontiers of their fields, China will want to exert some control given their potential strategic value. This creates a dilemma for Chinese tech founders with global ambitions. The more successful they become, the more attractive they are to global partners and investors—but also the more likely Beijing is to treat them as national strategic assets. This tension will likely grow over time.

Chinese battery makers had 70% of the global EV battery market in 2025. South Korean battery makers are struggling to remain profitable. Top 5 battery makers: 1. 🇨🇳 CATL 39.2% 2. 🇨🇳 BYD 16.4% 3. 🇰🇷 LG Energy 9.2% 4. 🇨🇳 CALB 5.3% 5. 🇨🇳 Gotion 4.5% Chart: asia.nikkei.com/business/aut…