Goldman CEO says AI financing demand stays strong despite investor doubts

Investors are questioning whether vast AI infrastructure spending will pay off, but Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon says demand to finance it remains strong. In a November 9 interview with CNBC’s Leslie Picker, he pointed to recent deal activity and said he expected capital-markets activity to continue over the next two months.

Goldman has been “very active” in AI-related capital-markets deals in recent weeks, Solomon said. His assessment contrasts with the retreat in AI-related shares, including chipmakers and companies that rent computing capacity, as investors reconsider the returns on hundreds of billions of dollars flowing into infrastructure.

Solomon acknowledged the market’s swings rather than dismissing them. Changes in the political environment are among the factors prompting investors to reassess, he said. Still, he maintained his long-term belief that AI can drive productivity across the economy—a forecast about its potential, not a measure of returns already delivered.

The interview also touched on a specific test of investor appetite: Anthropic’s potential initial public offering. Goldman is among the banks leading that process, according to CNBC. That gives the bank a direct role in bringing an AI company to public markets, alongside Solomon’s broader assessment of financing demand.

Solomon declined to discuss the offering in detail and kept his answer conditional: “We’ll see, obviously, if this IPO moves forward, how it all plays out.” He nevertheless described the market environment as “still pretty constructive.” His comments did not commit Anthropic to completing an offering.

On construction, Solomon pushed back against political resistance to data centers. He argued that the infrastructure is important to the U.S. economy and can be built responsibly. His defense focused on where computing capacity gets built, not just whether investors remain willing to supply the money.

He warned that demand for computing would persist even if construction faced obstacles at home. In his view, the consequence would be infrastructure moving outside the United States—a result he said the country should avoid.