Will Broadcom publicly disclose custom AI silicon wins at a hyperscaler currently using Marvell by December 31, 2026?

The question asks about public disclosure, not the underlying competitive win itself. Broadcom has 4 quarterly earnings calls remaining in the resolution window plus investor days and press releases. Dual-sourcing norms mean hyperscalers already maintain relationships with both suppliers, and switching costs are program-level not customer-level. However, Broadcom typically describes customers anonymously -- their standard practice is to report customer count and revenue scale without naming. Over 11 months the probability of at least one disclosure is non-trivial, but Broadcom's NDA culture creates a meaningful barrier. The resolution criteria could be met through inference even without explicit naming, which raises the probability somewhat.

The resolution criteria requires Broadcom to 'publicly confirm new custom AI silicon engagements or production programs at hyperscaler customers that Marvell currently serves (specifically AWS, Google, Microsoft, or Meta).' This is a high bar. Broadcom's standard practice is anonymous customer references -- even Google TPU attribution came from Google's side, not Broadcom. The late-2025 rumors that the CEO denied are a weak contrarian signal, but the denial plus Amazon affirmation is meaningful. The expanding-pie environment means Broadcom can grow AI revenue without directly displacing Marvell at specific accounts. The structural tendency to NOT name customers works strongly against YES.

The base rate for a major semiconductor company publicly confirming competitive wins against a named competitor at specific customers over an 11-month window is quite low. Hock Tan is particularly disciplined about customer confidentiality. The resolution effectively requires either Broadcom breaking convention, the customer disclosing, or SEC filings revealing the relationship. With the Moat Mapper rating Broadcom overlap as Medium likelihood -- the underlying win may happen but DISCLOSURE is a separate, lower-probability event. P(underlying win) * P(disclosure | win) over 11 months yields approximately 0.5 * 0.6 = 0.30, plus a small baseline from existing dynamics being recharacterized. Combined ~0.38.

Broadcom already has Google as a custom AI silicon customer (TPU), and Google is listed as a Marvell customer too. The question focuses on NEW engagements. The 11-month window, dual-sourcing norms, and Broadcom's aggressive AI expansion all point to underlying wins being plausible. But public disclosure is the bottleneck -- Broadcom's culture of anonymous customer references makes explicit confirmation unlikely. The most probable path to YES is through the hyperscaler side (AWS or Microsoft press releases), not Broadcom disclosures. But hyperscalers also tend to be vague about chip suppliers. Medium-probability event.

The late-2025 rumors are the most telling signal. Rumors of lost hyperscaler business don't emerge from nothing -- they typically reflect real competitive dynamics leaking through supply chain channels. The CEO denied and Amazon affirmed, but this is standard damage control. Even if exaggerated, it signals active Broadcom competition at Marvell accounts. Given Broadcom's AI revenue is scaling rapidly and they need to justify valuations, there's increasing pressure to disclose customer breadth. Hock Tan has been progressively more specific about AI customers over recent calls, with the trend toward disclosure accelerating. The CFO insider purchase at $78 suggests confidence but doesn't negate competitive dynamics.

Systematic decomposition: P(Broadcom actually wins at Marvell customer) is approximately 0.5 based on Moat Mapper's Medium likelihood rating. P(it becomes public given it happens) over 11 months depends on channel: earnings call vaguery (low probability), press release (medium), analyst research (medium), customer disclosure (low-medium). Across 4 quarterly cycles, if the win exists, probability of public confirmation is approximately 0.55-0.65. Combined: 0.5 * 0.6 = 0.30. Adding baseline probability of existing dynamics meeting resolution criteria: +0.08. The 2-3 year co-development cycles mean new programs started in 2025-2026 may not reach disclosure-worthy milestones within the window.

Dual-sourcing is the norm at hyperscalers, and Broadcom is the only alternative to Marvell. The 11-month window is long, providing multiple disclosure opportunities. However, semiconductor companies rarely name customer overlaps publicly. Broadcom's anonymous disclosure pattern works against resolution. Late-2025 rumors suggest underlying competitive activity but CEO denied and Amazon affirmed partnership. Net assessment slightly below coin-flip.

Two key factors dominate: (1) Broadcom has strong incentive to grow AI customer count narratively -- they want to go from '3 large customers' to '4-5' for the investor story, which could lead to more specific disclosures. (2) But they consistently avoid naming customers. Resolution requires specificity that semiconductor industry culture resists. The Moat Mapper's Medium likelihood for underlying wins plus the long window provides reasonable but not high probability. The competitive gap narrowing at 1.6T PAM DSP suggests technology-driven competition intensifying.

Medium likelihood of underlying Broadcom wins per Moat Mapper assessment, but lower likelihood of public disclosure given semiconductor NDA culture. The long window (11 months) helps but Broadcom's consistent refusal to name customers is the binding constraint. Even if Broadcom wins at AWS or Microsoft, Hock Tan's historical pattern is to reference them anonymously. Resolution requires more specificity than Broadcom typically provides.