u/Artistic_Call3016

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

[supprimé]

[removed]

I want to lay out a clean, numbers-driven view of what 2026 could look like if current conditions hold.

Start with the baseline.

FY2025 revenue: $81.8M
Volume: about 28M gallons
Average price: $2.92 per gallon

Now fast forward to today.

Fuel prices are sitting around $4.00, with projections pointing higher due to ongoing supply disruptions and a tight global market. Some scenarios even push Brent into the $123–126 range, which historically translates into retail fuel prices in the mid-$4s or higher.

Let’s model that.

At $4.05 average pricing, revenue becomes about $113.6M.
At $4.30–4.50, which aligns with mid-range scenarios, revenue moves into $120M–126M.
At $4.65, tied to higher-end oil forecasts, revenue reaches about $130M.

That’s a 39% to 59% increase over the baseline.

And again, that’s with the same volume.

Now let’s look at quarterly impact.

Q1 2026 pricing likely averages around $3.90–4.10.
At 7M gallons, that’s about $28M revenue.

Compare that to roughly $15M in Q1 2025, and you get +80% YoY growth.

That’s potentially the strongest quarterly growth the company has ever reported.

Now layer in margins.

Q4 2025 gross margin was around 10.4%.
Apply that to a $130M revenue run rate, and quarterly gross profit lands around $3.3M–3.6M.

If margins improve to 12–13%, which is reasonable in a tighter supply environment, quarterly gross profit could reach $4.5M–5.5M.

That’s a significant step up from previous levels.

But there’s more.

The company isn’t just relying on fuel.

It has a pipeline of about $750M in energy projects, including microgrids and battery storage. If even 20% of that converts over time, that’s $150M in additional revenue potential, likely at higher margins.

Some project economics are already clear:

A 200 MW microgrid can generate $20–25M annually under long-term contracts.
Smaller solar + storage projects can produce millions over their lifespan with built-in escalation.

So you end up with a layered growth model:

Fuel revenue scales with pricing
Energy projects add long-term, higher-margin income
Macro trends support both segments

And the macro is strong right now.

Energy prices are projected to rise 24% globally.
AI is driving $65B in power infrastructure spending.
Oil markets are tight and volatile.

Put it all together, and 2026 starts to look like a transition year.

Not just growth, but a shift in how the company is perceived.

From a small logistics player to a hybrid energy company with exposure to both short-term pricing and long-term infrastructure.

That’s the kind of setup where expectations can change quickly once the numbers start showing up in earnings.

Interested to hear how others are modeling the upside. Are you assuming normalization later in the year, or sustained high pricing throughout 2026?

Sometimes it helps to strip everything down and just look at the basics.

NRED is a copper-gold exploration company with a market value around ~$37M USD. It controls over 11,500 hectares in British Columbia, which is one of the more established jurisdictions for porphyry deposits.

Surface sampling has shown copper grades around 0.6% on average with higher peaks above 1%. That’s already in line with or above many producing assets globally.

The company is currently focused on advancing toward drill-ready targets through geophysics in 2026. That’s the immediate catalyst.

From there, drilling could begin in 2027, which is typically the stage where valuations start to move more aggressively if results are positive.

On the macro side, copper is trading near ~$5.9/lb, with expectations pointing slightly higher. Year-over-year gains are close to 29%, which is not a weak backdrop.

At the same time, there’s a confirmed supply deficit at the concentrate level for 2026, estimated at 317,000 tonnes. That reinforces the idea that new supply will be needed.

So putting it all together:

• Small market cap
• Large land package
• Encouraging surface data
• Clear path to next milestone
• Strong macro environment

That’s typically what people look for in early-stage exploration plays.

The key takeaway is that the company is still being valued based on what it is today, not what it could become after the next steps.

And in this sector, that difference is where most of the upside usually comes from.

I think a lot of people still underestimate how physical the current energy bottleneck actually is.

This isn’t just about policy or investment cycles. It’s about infrastructure reaching its designed limits while demand accelerates in parallel.

Let’s start with the base layer.

Large North American transformers are now around 38 to 40 years old, basically at end-of-life. On top of that, roughly 70% of transmission lines and transformers are older than 25 years.

So the system carrying today’s load is already heavily aged.

Now add demand pressure.

U.S. electricity demand is projected to grow:

• 1.2% in 2026
• 3.3% in 2027

But the real acceleration is coming from data centers:

• 176 TWh in 2023
• projected 325 to 580 TWh by 2028

That alone represents up to 74 to 132 GW of additional demand, or potentially up to 12% of total U.S. electricity usage.

That’s where things start to break away from incremental thinking.

Because the system wasn’t designed for that kind of layered load increase on top of aging infrastructure.

And what’s interesting is how the system responds when it approaches physical limits - it doesn’t fail all at once, it becomes less flexible.

That’s visible in reserve margins already tightening in multiple regions, often down to 5% to 10%, compared to historical norms of 15% to 20%.

So the question becomes: where does incremental capacity actually come from?

This is where decentralized energy models start to look more relevant.

Microgrids, storage systems, and localized generation don’t need to wait for large-scale transmission upgrades. They can be deployed closer to demand centers, especially where grid capacity is already constrained.

And this is where NXXT fits into the broader picture.

They’re building toward integrated energy systems that combine generation, mobility, storage, and AI-based optimization. That structure aligns well with a system that increasingly needs flexibility at the edge rather than just scale at the center.

It’s not about replacing the grid. It’s about supplementing a grid that is increasingly operating near its limits.

From an investment perspective, I think the key question isn’t whether demand grows - it clearly does. The question is which models can actually connect to that demand in a constrained system.

And that’s where decentralized approaches start to matter more than they used to.

Would be interested in how others are positioning around this shift from centralized scaling to distributed deployment.